BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Prepared  by  a Committee  of  the 
NATIONAL  REFORM  ASSOCIATION. 

A List  of  Works  treating  of  the  Origin,  Nature,  Sphere  and  End 

of  Civil  Government. 


In  presenting  to  the  public  a list  of  works  on  Civil  Government  two 
"Beets  are  kept  in  view : first,  to  give  a classified  list  of  the  principal  books 
Wring  on  political  and  social  questions,  the  study  of  which  will  give  quite 
| and  accurate  knowledge  on  all  the  important  questions  relating  to  the 
Jgin  of  the  nation,  its  moral  character  and  accountability,  the  source  of 
whority  in  civil  government,  the  sphere  of  governmental  activity,  and  the 
|ls  for  which  it  exists ; second,  to  help  investigators  to  see  for  themselves 
It  the  fundamental  principles  of  civil  government  are  of  a religious  nature, 
1 that  this  is  maintained  by  the  great  body  of  writers  on  political  questions. 
1 It  is  not  to  be  understood  that  the  placing  of  any  book  in  this  list 
jolves  an  endorsement  of  all  its  teachings.  Some  of  them  are  far  astray 
] certain  essential  principles.  But  no  work  is  placed  in  this  list  that 
s not  with  more  or  less  ability  maintain  one  or  more  of  the  Christian 
iciples  of  civil  government. 

It  is  not  maintained  that  the  authors  of  these  works  would  assent 
all  the  conclusions  drawn  from  their  teachings  by  the  National  Reform 
feociation.  It  is  maintained  however,  that  these  conclusions  follow  as 
logical  conclusion  from  the  political  principles  these  authors  advocate. 

The  student  of*  political  science  finds  very  early  in  his  studies  that 
$at  is  known  as  the  Social  Compact  theory  of  government  receives  a 
:at  deal  of  attention.  No  one,  in  fact,  can  pretend  to  be  well  informed  in 
itical  science  who  does  not  know  pretty  thoroughly  the  origin,  the  history, 
the  characteristics  of  this  theory.  This  is  so  for  many  rea- 
It  has  been  widely  accepted  in  former  years  by  political 
Biters  in  this  and  in  other  countries.  It  has  been  incorporated 

lo  some  of  our  States  constitutions.  It  is  about  the  only  one  of  the 
Joneous  theories  of  past  generations  that  still  has  its  advocates.  It  con- 
Jis  elements  of  truth  which  every  candid  mind  must  admit.  It  aims 
^ account  for  the  very  fact  of  societv.  to  explain  why  we  have 
il  government,  whence  the  right  to  establish  it  proceeds,  and  claims  to 
■Lall  this  in  a social  compact  or  mutual  agreement  of  men.  In  this  it 
Iches  false  political  doctrine.  What  it  can  and  does  do  is  to  explain  how 


1 

Is- 


any  particular  government  came  into  being,  how  the  men  in  office  came  to  be 
clothed  with  authority,  and  how  the  existing  constitutions  and  codes  of 
law  were  adopted.  These  things  are  the  result  of  compact  or  agreement, 
and  in  this  department  of  political  science  this  theory  has  its  place.  i 

It  has  been  thought  best  to  begin  the  list  of  books  with  one  that 
advocates  the  Social  Compact  theory  of  government  as  the  fairest  way  to 
bring  the  whole  matter  before  the  minds  of  investigators.  Thomas  Hobbes 
is  chosen  as  the  representative  of  this  school  of  political  philosophers  because 
in  a sense  he  was  the  founder  of  the  school.  Others  before  him  had  main- 
tained some  of  the  principles  of  the  theory,  but  to  him  belongs  the  credit, 
of  reducing  it  to  a clear  and  systematic  form.  Mr.  Hobbes  is  selected  for 
the  additional  reason  that  he,  after  all,  maintains  some  of  the  fundamental 
principles  of  Christian  government.  He  is  often  spoken  of  as  an 
atheist,  but  this  he  certainly  was  not.  In  his  philosophy  he  was  what  is  now, 
known  as  a materialist,  and  it  is  generally  believed  that  his  teachings  in 
philosophy  would  undermine  all  religious  faith,  but  he  was  very  much 
averse  to  being  classed  with  heretics  in  religion,  and  Part  III  of  the  work 
referred  to  below  -is  entitled,  “Of  A Christian  Commonwealth.” 


I.  WORKS  ON  POLITICAL  SCIENCE. 

Leviathan.  By  Thomas  Hobbes.  George  Routledge  and  Sons,  London. 

Hobbes  starts  with  the  supposition  that  there  was  a period  when 
society  and  government  did  not  exist,  a state  of  nature  when  all  men  were 
absolutely  free.  Of  this  state  of  nature  he  says : 


“Hereby  it  is  manifest,  that  during  the  time  men  lived  without  a common 
power  to  keep  them  all  in  awe,  they  were  in  that  condition  which  is  called 
war;  and  such  a war,  as  is  of  every  man  against  every  man.”  (p.  64.)  Tc 
this  war  of  every  man  against  every  man,  this  also  is  consequent;  tha: 
nothing  can  be  unjust.  The  notions  of  right  and  wrong,  justice  and  in- 
justice  have  then  no  place.  Where  there  is  no  common  power,  then; 
is  no  law;  where  no  law,  no  injustice.”,  (p.  65.)  “Because  the  conditior 

of  man,  . . is  a condition  of  war  of  every  one  against  every  one;  m whict 

case  every  one  is  governed  by  his  own  reason;  and  there  is  notmng  htj 
can  make  use  of,  that  may  not  be  a help  to  him,  in  preserving  his  lifj 
against  his  enemies;  it  followeth,  that  in  such  a condition,  every  mat; 
has  a right  to  every  thing;  even  to  another’s  body.  And  therefore,  a: 
long  as  this  natural  right  of  every  man  to  everything  endureth,  there  can  b< 
no  security  to  any  man,  how  strong  or  wise  soever  he  may  be,  of  living  ouj 
the  time  which  Nature  ordinarily  allotteth  men  to  live  (p.  6b.) 

On  the  origin  of  the  Commonwealth  he  says:  The  final  cause,  end! 

Hocian  of  men  who  naturallv  love  liberty,  and  dominion  over  others; 


2 


0 • 

fir  1 b 

sr 

wills,  by  plurality  of  voices,  unto  one  will:  . . . This  done,  the  multitude 
so  united  in  one  person  is  called  a ‘commonwealth,’  in  latin  ‘civitas.’  This  is 
the  generation  of  that  great  ‘leviathan’  or  rather  to  speak  more  reverently, 
of  that  mortal  god  to  which  we  owe  under  the  ‘immortal  God,’  our  peace 

0^0  and  defence.”  (pp.  82,  84.) 

This  account  is  here  given  because  it  has  figured  prominently  in 
political  science  and  in  the  framing  of  constitutions  of  civil  government. 
It  has  had  a long  period  of  dominant  influence  in  the  United  States,  many 
of  our  State  constitutions  setting  it  forth  as  the  true  theory  of  the  origin  of 
the  State. 

Hobbes  regarded  this  Leviathan  when  once  it  was  created  as  having 
supreme  authority,  and  denied  to  the  individual  contractors  the  right  to 
break  the  agreement.  But  he  held  that  the  monarch  or  sovereign  assem- 
bly “hath  immediate  authority  from  God,  . . and  no  man  but  the  sover- 

eign receiveth  his  power  Dei  gratia  simply.”  Again  he  says,  “Sovereigns  in 
their  own  dominions  are  their  sole  legislators,”  but,  he  adds,  “It  is  true, 
that  God  is  the  sovereign  of  all  sovereigns;  and  when  he  speaks  to  any 
subject  he  ought  to  be  obeyed,  whatsoever  any  earthly  potentate  command 
to  the  contrary.”  (p.  172.)  Of  Jesus  Christ  the  Messiah  he  maintains 
that  in  the  future  he  is  to  be  Messianic  King,  but  that  “as  God  he  is 
king  already  and  ever  shall  be,  of  all  the  earth,  in  virtue  of  his  om- 
nipotence.” 

The  next  great  advocate  of  this  theory  after  Hobbes  was  Locke. 
His  political  writings  are  entitled,  “Two  Treatises  of  Government.”  In 
the  first  he  controverts  the  Patriarchal  theory  as  advocated  by  Robert 
Filmer,  and  in  the  second  he  sets  forth  the  social  compact  theory.  But 
instead  of  arriving  at  Hobbes’  conclusion  that  the  compact  creates  a 
despotic  power,  he  reached  the  very  opposite  conclusion  that  it  is  the 
bulwark  of  liberty.  Rousseau,  a citizen  of  Geneva,  next  took  up  this 
theory  and  in  his  work  entitled  Contrat  Social,  gave  it  the  shape  in  which 
it  has  had  the  most  influence  in  the  United  States.  Brownson  says  that 
“the  theory  was  generally  adopted  by  the  American  people  in  the  last 
century  and  is  still  the  more  prevalent  theory  with  those  of  them  who 
happen  to  have  any  theory  or  opinion  on  the  subject.” 


The  Science  of  Politics.  By  Sheldon  Amos.  D.  Appleton  and  Co. 
tfew  York. 

Professor  Amos  says  of  the  Social  Compact  theory,  that  it  is  “fictitious 
in  itself,  and  added  nothing  to  the  fact  of  obligation  on  either  side,  while 
it  led  to  political  confusion  by  withdrawing  people’s  minds  from  the  real 
grounds  and  moral  foundation  on  which  the  reciprocal  duties  of  the 
Governor  and  the  Governed  rest.”  (p.  46.) 


The  Christian  State.  By  S.  Z.  Batten.  The  Griffith  and  Rowland 
3ress,  Philadelphia. 

Mr.  Batten  finds  “the  origin  of  the  State  in  the  Nature  of  man  and 
the  purpose  of  God.”  This  view  he  says  “gives  us  two  things  that  we 
need  for  all  clear  and  rational  thought.  It  gives  us  at  once  the  origin  of 
the  State  and  the  justification  for  its  existance.  It  grounds  the  State  in 
the  very  nature  of  mari  and  the  purpose  of  God,  and  it  contains  a justifi- 
cation for  its  existance  in  the  very  nature  of  life  itself.”  (pp.  52,  53.) 

Chapter  XII  is  entitled  “The  State  and  its  Religion.”  He  speaks  as 
follows  on  this  topic:  “In  all  ages  and  lands  religion  has  been  the  potent 
factor  in  human  life,  and  the  central  feature  of  human  history.  The  chief 
fact  with  regard  to  a man,  says  Carlyle,  is  his  religion.  ‘The  truth  is’ 
says  Professor  Seeley,  ‘that  religion  is  and  always  has  been,  the  basis  of 
societies  and  States.  It  is  no  mere  philosophy,  but  a practical  view  of 
life  which  whole  communities  live  by.  . . From  history  we  learn  that 
the  great  function  of  religion  has  been  the  founding  and  sustaining  of 
States.  And  at  this  moment  we  are  threatened  with  a general  dissolution 


3 


of  States  from  the  decay  of  religion.’  This  means  that  the  kind  and 

quality  of  a people’s  religion  will  both  create  and  determine  their  social 

and  political  institutions.  And  this  means  that  the  decay  and  degener- 
ation of  a people’s  social  and  civil  life  can  be  traced  back  to  the  decline 

and  decay  of  their  religion.  . . It  is  unfortunate  that  this  larger  question 

of  the  State  and  its  religion  has,  in  these  Western  lands  in  modern  times 
been  narrowed  down  to  the  smaller  one  of  the  relation  of  Church  and 
State.  This  latter  question  has  played  an  important  part  in  the  history  of 
political  thought;  and  it  promises  to  play  an  even  more  important  part  in 
the  drama  of  the  future.  In  the  United  States  and  France  a temporary 
solution  and  a working  modus  vivendi  have  been  discovered.  But  it  is  evident 
to  all  careful  observers  that  the  present  relation  is  not  by  any  means  the 
solution  of  the  problem,  and  the  last  word  on  the  question  has  not  been 
spoken.  . . This  whole  movement  in  behalf  of  liberty  of  conscience  and 

the  separation  of  Church  and  State,  has  been  largely  negative  in  charac- 
ter. . . Again,  to  know  the  sphere  of  Christian  manifestation  we  must 

know  what  is  the  essential  idea  of  Christianity.  It  has  become  evident  that 
the  idea  of  the  kingdom  of  God  is  the  very  center  and  circumference  of 
the  Christian  system.  . . . But  the  kingdom  is  not  only  a personal  ideal, 

but  a social  ideal  as  well.  . . In  what  is  called  the  Church  we  have  one 
of  the  institutions  of  the  kingdom  and  of  the  agencies  for  its  extension  in 
the  world.  But  a natural  and  inevitable  question  meets  us  at  this  point: 
Is  the  Church  the  sole  institution  of  Christianity?  When  the  Christian 
spirit  has  created  the  Christian  Church,  has  it  fulfilled  its  whole  mission 
in  the  world?  The  very  conception  of  the  religion  of  Christ,  the  very 
idea  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  forbids  such  a conclusion.  And  so  we  must 
widen  the  boundaries  of  the  kingdom  till  they  have  included  all  the  relations 
and  institutions  of  man’s  life,  the  family,  and  the  State,  no  less  than 
the  Church.  . . The  religion  of  Christ,  which  is  the  religion  of  the  king- 

dom of  God,  must  have  to  do  with  civic  and  social  affairs  no  less  than 
with  personal  and  ecclesiastical  matters.  . . They  who  would  exclude 
religion  from  political  affairs  show  an  utter  misconception  of  the  nature 
of  religion  and  the  work  of  the  Church.  It  matters  not  whether  this 
divorce  is  pronounced  in  the  name  of  religion  or  politics  it  is  wrong 
in  principle  and  pernicious  in  results.  They  who  say  that  the  Church  is  the 
one  sole  institution  of  religion,  and  that  religion  has  nothing  to  do  with 
social  and  political  affairs,  utterly  misconceive  the  work  of  the  Church  and 
the  nature  of  religion.  They  who  say  that  the  State  is  a non-religious 
realm,  and  with  it  Christianity  has  nothing  to  do,  misunderstand  the  nature 
of  Christianity  and  the  meaning  of  the  State.  Religion  is  a universal 
principle  and  has  to  do  with  all  life.  The  Church  is  one  of  the  institutions 
of  religion,  but  the  State  needs  religion  as  much  as  the  Church.”  (pp.  294, 
301.) 


The  American  Republic,  By  O.  A.  Brownson,  LL.  D.  P.  O’Shea,  1 
New  York. 

In  combatting  the  Social  Compact  theory  of  government  as  maintained 
by  Hobbes  and  others,  he  says:  “The  theory  under  examination  denies  | 
that  society  has  any  rights  except  such  as  it  derives  from  individuals  who 
all  have  equal  rights.  According  to  it,  society  is  itself  conventional,  and  1 
created  by  free,  independent,  equal,  sovereign  individuals.  Society  is  a 
congress  of  sovereigns,  in  which  no  one  has  authority  over  another,  and 
no  one  can  be  rightfully  forced  to  submit  to  any  decree  against  his  will. 
In  such  a congress  the  rule  of  the  majority  is  manifestly  improper,  ille- 
gitimate,  and  invalid,  unless  adopted  by  unanimous  consent. 

But  this  is  not  all.  The  individual  is  always  the  equal  of  himself,  and 
if  the  government  derives  powers  from  the  consent  of  the  governed,  he 
governs  in  the  government,  and  parts  with  none  of  his  original  sovereignty. 
The  government  is  not  his  master,  but  his  agent,  as  the  principal  only 
delegates,  not  surrenders,  his  rights  and  powers  to  the  agent.  He  is  free 
at  any  time  he  pleases  to  recall  the  powers  he  has  delegated,  to  give  new 
instructions,  or  to  dismiss  him.  The  sovereignty  of  the  individual  survives 
the  compact,  and  persists  through  all  the  acts  of  his  agent,  the  government. 


4 


He  must  then,  be  free  to  withdraw  from  the  compact  whenever  he  judges 
it  advisable.  Secession  is  perfectly  legitimate  if  government  is  simply  a 
compact  between  equals.  The  disaffected,  the  criminal,  the  thief  the 
government  would  send  to  prison,  or  the  murderer  it  would  hang,  would  be 
very  likely  to  revoke  his  consent,  and  to  secede  from  the  state.”  (pp.  62,63.) 
In  setting  forth  the  divine  origin  of  government  he  says:  “In  civil  society 
two  things  are  necessary — stability  and  movement.  The  human  is  the  element 
of  movement,  for  in  it  are  possibilities  that  can  be  only  successfully 
actualized.  But  the  element  of  stability  can  be  found  only  in  the  divine,  in 
God,  in  whom  there  is  no  unactualized  possibility,  who,  therefore,  is  im- 
movable, immutable,  and  eternal.  The  doctrine  that  derives  authority  from 
God  through  the  people,  recognizes  in  the  state  both  of  these  elements  and 
provides  alike  for  stability  and  progress. 

“This  doctorine  is  not  mere  theory;  it  simply  states  the  real  order 
of  things.  It  is  not  telling  what  ought  to  be,  but  what  is  in  the  real 
order.”  (p.  123.)  In  defining  the  method  whereby  this  authority  is  derived 
by  the  people  from  God,  he  says:  “The  right  of  government  to  govern,  or 
political  authority,  is  derived  by  the  collective  people  or  society,  from  God 
through  the  law  of  nature.  Rulers  hold  from  God  through  the  people  or 
nation,  and  the  people  or  nation  hold  from  God  through  the  natural  law.” 
(p.  133.) 


Essays  and  Reviews.  By  O.  A.  Brownson,  LL.D.  P.  J.  Kennedy  and 
ons,  New  York. 

Many  writers  on  Democracy  consider  the  people  as  the  fountain  source 
of  authority  and  law.  Brownson  goes  back  one  step  farther  and  asks  who 
or  what  is  to  take  care  of  the  people?  “The  people  take  care  of  govern- 
ment and  education,  but  who  or  what  is  to  take  care  of  the  people,  who  need 
taking  care  of  quite  as  much  as  either  education  or  government?  We 
know  of  but  one  solution  of  the  difficulty,  and  that  is  in  religion.  There  is 
no  foundation  for  virtue  but  in  religion,  and  it  is  only  religion  that  can 
command  the  degree  of  popular  virtue  and  intelligence  rejuisite  to  insure  to 
popular  government  the  right  direction  and  a wise  and  just  administration.” 
(Page  372.) 

The  Principles  of  Politic  Law.  By  J.  J.  Burlamaqui.  John  Rice, 
hiblin, 

The  sources  and  binding  obligation  of  law  are  shown  to  have  a religious 
character.  “The  authority  of  the  laws  consists  in  the  force  given  them  by 
the  person  who,  being  invested  with  the  legislative  power,  has  a right  to 
enact  these  laws;  and  in  the  Divine  Will  which  commands  us  to  obey  Him. 
‘It  is  better  to  obey  God  than  men.’  For  in  promising  a faithful  obedience 
to  the  sovereign  we  could  never  do  it  but  on  condition  that  he  should  not 
order  anything  that  is  manifestly  contrary  to  the  laws  of  God,  whether 
natural  or  revealed.”  In  framing  law  the  sovereign  “should  pay  a perfect 
regard  to  these  primitive  rules  of  justice  which  God  Himself  has  estab- 
lished, and  take  care  that  his  laws  be  perfectly  comfortable  to  them.” 
(Pp.  123,  128,  129.) 

The  Ancient  City.  By  Fustel  De  Coulanges.  Lee  and  Shepard, 
oston. 

That  religion  permeated  early  customs  and  institutions,  constituting 
their  moving  power,  is  the  thesis  of  De  Coulanges.  “The  place  of  assembly 
of  the  Roman  senate  was  always  a temple.  If  a session  had  been  held  else- 
where than  in  a sacred  place,  its  acts  would  have  been  null  and  void,  for  the 
gods  would  not  have  been  present.  Before  every  deliberation,  the  presi- 
dent offered  a sacrifice  and  pronounced  a prayer.  The  political  institutions 


5 


of  the  city  were  born  with  the  city  itself  and  on  the  same  day  with  it.  Every 
member  of  the  city  carried  them  with  himself,  for  the  germ  of  them  was  in 
each  man’s  belief  and  religion.”  (Pp.  217,  231.) 


Lectures  on  the  Principles  of  Political  Obligation.  By  T.  H.  Green. 

Longmans,  Green  and  Company,  New  York. 

The  grounds  of  political  obligation  lie  in  the  State  as  the  pre-supposi- 
tion of  the  moral  life.  Without  the  State  man  could  not  reach  the  realiza- 
tion of  his  highest  and  best  self.  The  State,  therefore,  is  involved  in  the 
moral  nature  of  man  and  from  that  fact  derives  its  authority.  “The  condi- 
tion of  the  moral  life  is  the  possession  of  will  and  reason.  The  value, 
then,  of  the  institutions  of  civil  life  lies  in  their  operation  as  giving  reality 
to  these  capacities  of  will  and  reason,  and  enabling  them  to  be  really  exer- 
cised. The  moral  capacity  implies  a consciousness  on  the  part  of  the 
subject  of  the  capacity  that  its  realization  is  an  end  desirable  in  itself,  and 
rights  are  the  condition  of  realizing  it.” 


The  Sphere  of  the  State.  By  F.  S.  Hoffman,  Ph.D.  G.  P.  Putnams 

Sons,  New  York. 

In  dealing  with  the  Social  Compact  theory  of  government  Professor 
Hoffman  says  that  as  a theory  it  is  utterly  fallacious,  that  “it  led  to  the 
French  Revolution  and  our  late  rebellion,  and  that  wherever  introduced  it 
tends  to  national  strife  and  ultimate  disintegration.  As  a theory  of  gov- 
ernment it  is  a true  doctrine,  if  we  mean  simply  the  form  of  the  govern- 
ment. It  is  not  left  to  the  people  whether  they  will  have  a government  oi 
not,  any  more  than  it  is  left  to  them  to  determine  whether  or  not  they  will 
live  in  a State.  The  government  is  a necessity  as  truly  as.  the  State,  but  the 
people  in  their  organic  capacity  as  a State  ought  to  determine  by  social  corn- 
pact  not  only  who  are  to  be  their  governors,  but  also  the  mode  of  then 
selection  and  the  sphere  of  their  activities.  ...  All  just  governmerr 
is  of  God  through  the  people.  For  man  is  so  made  by  his  Creator  that  he 
must  live  in  a State,  and  the  State  must  have  a government.  (Pp. 

On  the  relation  of  the  State  to  religion  the  author  says:  ‘We  unhesi- 
tatingly advocate  the  doctrine  that  religious  instruction,  as  well  as  secular 
should  be  given  in  the  schools  of  the  State.  But  solely  as  a means  to  ar 
end — not  as  an  end  in  itself.”  (P.  46.) 


Political  Ethics.  By  Francis  Lieber,  LL.  D.  J.  B.  Lippmcoot  ane 
Co.  Philadelphia. 

On  the  moral  character  and  personality  of  the  State  Dr.  Lieber  says 
“The  state  being  a jural  society,  and  rights  being  imaginable  betweei 
moral  beings  only,  it  follows  that  the  state  has  likewise  a moral  characte 
and  must  maintain  it.  From  what  constitutes  right,  as  has  been  shown 
it  appears  that  no  right,  consequently  no  specific  rights,  can  exist  betweei 
animals  or  irrational  beings,  since  the  right  is  founded  on  the  claim  eac 
rational  or  moral  being  makes  on  every  other  rational  or  moral  being. 

(Vol  I.  pp.  158,  159.)  T . , . , 

In  opposition  to  the  Social  Compact  theory  Dr.  Lieber  speaks  thus 
“Wherever  we  find  men,  in  whatever  stage  of  social  development,  th 
barbarous  Patagonians,  the  restless  son  of  the  desert,  the  moving  hunter  o 
the  prairie,  the  piratical  Malay,  the  forlorn  Esquimaux,  the  slavish  Asiati 
or  the  free  American,  the  submissive  Russian  or  the  manly  Briton,  wher 
there  are  men,  there  are  also  rules,  rulers  and  ruled,  ordainers  and  obeyer 
judges  and  judged,  those  that  have  power  and  those  that  yield  obedience 
chieftain  and  followers,  princes  and  subjects,  magistrates  and  citizens 
always  superiors  and  inferiors.  The  state  is  natural  to  man,  is  absolut 
necessary  to  man.”  (Vol.,1.  pp.  215,  216.) 


6 


Civil  Liberty  and  Self  Government.  By  Francis  Lieber,  LL.  D.  J. 
».  Lippincott  and  Co.  Philadelphia. 

On  the  question  of  Church  and  State  and  religion  and  the  State  Dr. 
Lieber  says:  “The  Americans  consider  it  (the  separation  of  Church  and 
State,)  as  a legitimate  consequence  of  the  liberty  of  conscience.  They 
believe  that  the  contrary  would  lead  to  disastrous  results  with  reference  to 
religion  itself,  and  it  is  undeniable  that  another  state  of  things  could  not  by 
possibility  have  been  established  here.  We  believe,  moreover,  that  the  great 
mission  of  this  country  has  to  perform,  with  reference  to  Europe,  requires 
this  total  divorce  of  state  and  church  (not  religion),  (p.  259.) 

First  Principles  in  Politics.  By  William  Samuel  Lilly,  Honorary  FeL 
>w  of  Peterhour,  Cambridge.  John  Murray,  London. 

“Civil  society  is  natural  to  man,  and  so  may,  and  must,  be  regarded  by 
all  theists  as  instituted  by  the  Author  of  Nature.  (P.  21.) 

The  State  and  the  Individual.  By  William  Sharp  McKechnie,  LL.  B. 
imes  MacLehose  and  Sons,  Glasgow. 

In  speaking  of  the  impossibility  of  excluding  religion  and  morality 
from  the  sphere  of  the  State  he  says  that  once  “It  was  held  that  the  world 

might  be  split  as  by  the  stroke  of  a knife  into  two  compartments — the 

spiritual  and  temporal — over  which  Pope  and  Emperor  should  respectively 
rule.  The  course  of  history.  . . is  sufficient  of  itself  to  prove  the 

fallacy  on  which  this  division  rested.  Philosophy  gives  an  equally  clear 

denial  to  the  possibility  of  any  such  absolute  dualism” 

“It  may  still  be  asked  whether  the  State’s  proper  sphere  includes 
morality.  It  is  sometimes  said  that  it  does  not,  but  several  reasons  show 
that  it  is  impossible  for  the  legislative  and  adminstrative  authorities 
utterly  to  banish  all  moral  considerations  from  their  ken.  In  the  first 
place,  each  State  must  act  among  other  States,  and  is  forced  to  deal  with 
matters  involving  questions  of  morality  whether  it  like  it  or  no.  It  may, 
at  its  peril,  consistently  ignore  the  ethical  aspects  of  what  it  does,  or 
boldly  declare  its  defiance  of  them,  but  this  refusal  to  see  the  light  does 
not  evade  penal  responsibility  or  avoid  the  consequences  of  a violated  moral 
law.”  (p.  94.) 

“No  true  right  of  the  individual  can  be  opposed  to  the  rights  of  a moral 
State.”  (p.  433.) 


The  Nation.  By  K.  Mulford.  Hurd  and  Houghton,  New  York. 

Dr.  Mulford  presents  a number  of  arguments  to  prove  that  the  nation 
is  a moral  person,  the  chief  of  which  are  these:  “This  is  the  condition  of 
its  vocation,  as  in  the  fulfilment  of  its  vocation  there  is  the  formation  of 
its  character.”  “The  nation  is  a moral  person,  since  it  is  called  as  a power 
in  the  coming  kingdom  in  which  there  is  the  moral  government  of  the 
world,  and  in  whose  completion  there  is  the  goal  of  history.  It  is  a power 
in  the  moral  conflict  and  conquest  which  is  borne  through  history,  to  the 
final  triumph  of  the  good.”  “The  being  of  the  nation  as  a moral  person 
has  its  witness  in  the  consciousness  of  men.  It  has  awakened  the  higher 
moral  emotion,  and  its  response  has  been  from  the  higher  moral  spirit. 
It  has,  called  forth  the  willing  sacrifice  of  those  who  were  worthy.  The  life 
of  the  individual  has  been  given  for  the  life  of  the  nation.”  (pp.  19,  21.) 

On  the  origin  of  the  nation  with  its  power  and  authority  he  says: 
“The  nation  has  a divine  foundation,  and  has  for  its  end  the  fulfillment  of 
the  divine  in  history.”  “The  evidence  of  the  origin  of  the  nation  is  in  its 
necessary  nature.”  “The  nation  is  an  organic  unity;  it  is  not  an  artificial 
fabric  nor  an  abstract  system,  but  it  is  a life  which  is  definite  and  disparate, 
and  has  a development;  therefore  it  has  not  its  origin  in  the  individual  nor 


7 


the  collective  will  of  man,  but  must  proceed  from  a power  which  can| 

determine  the  origin  of  organic  being 

“The  evidence  of  the  origin  of  the  nation  is  also  in  its  being  a moral 
person.  There  is  and  can  be  for  personality,  as  it  transcends  physical 
nature,  only  a divine  origin,  and  its  realization  is  in  a divine  relation.’ 
“The  powers  with  which  the  nation  is  invested  are  also  indicative  of  its; 
origin.  It  is  clothed  with  an  authority,  and  has  a majesty  which  no  powei 
of  earth  may  assume.  The  affirmation  of  its  will  is  law,  but  apart  from  it 
the  will  of  no  man  and  no  collection  of  men,  is  law  for  another.  The  righi 
of  government  is  its  right,  but  apart  from  it  no  man  and  no  collection  of  mer 
have  the  right  to  govern  another,  and  it  belongs  to  the  nation  only  as  it  is] 
of  divine  right.  There  is  no  human  ground  on  which  it  can  rest.  They  whcj 
are  intrusted  with  it  hold  it  as  the  representatives  of  the  nation,  and  as  the 
ministers  of  the  divine  purpose  in  the  nation.  The  President  and  the  Com 
gress,  as  the  Crown  and  the  Parliament  rule  by  the  grace  of  God.  . . If  the 
divine  origin  and  foundation  of  the  nation  is  denied,  the  authority  of  its 
government  is  resolved  into  mere  force.”  (pp.  54,  59.) 

“As  the  nation  is  called  to  be  a power  in  history,  it  is  in  the  realizatioi 
of  its  being  the  Christian  nation.  It  is  this  in  its  necessary  conception 
It  has  not  in  its  option  the  alternative  to  determine  whether  it  shall  be,  bu 
yet  shall  or  shall  not  be  this,  but  its  necessary  realization  is  the  Christiai 
nation.  . . The  only  completion  of  the  state  is  in  the  Christian  state." 

(p.  368.)’  , , 

“The  Christ  is  represented  in  his  coming  as  the  only  King,  and  as  neare 
to  humanity  than  in  the  earlier  ages  and  as  revealing  in  his  own  life  th 
foundation  of  its  eternal  relationships.  The  Christ  is  called  the  only  Kin£ 
the  Deliverer,  in  obedience  to  whom  the  freedom  of  the  individual  an 
the  nation  consists.  And  as  there  has  been  in  nations  the  recognition  o 
the  Christ  as  the  King,  there  has  been  the  formation  of  a national  lift 
and  the  unity  in  which  alone  the  divisions  of  race  are  overcome;  and  a 
the  nations  have  rejected  the  Christ  as  the  King,  no  more  a power  in  hi 
kingdom,  they  have  passed  from  history.”  (pp.  386,  387.) 


Government  and  the  State. 

Sons,  New  York.  (1902.)  , 


By  Frederick  Wood.  G.  P.  Putnam 


“The  universality  of  religious  sentiment  is  strictly  that  which  brings 
within  State  jurisdiction.  Of  the  many  qualities  which  form  the  characti 
of  a community,  one  is  the  moral  ton,  the  aggregate  of  opinion  on  ethic 
Questions.  Whatever  violates  this  tone  endangers  the  State.  Religioi 
of  extreme  difference  cannot  dwell  together  and  must  find  their  abode 
countries  of  consonant  ideas.  These  facts  impress  upon  all  States,  to 
limited  degree,  a religious  character.  This  degree  has  nothing  in J cons, 
nance  with  that  attaching  to  the  union  of  Church  and  State..  (Pp.  Ill,  1 1^ 


Political  Science.  By  Theodore  D.  Woolsey,  Tate  President  of  \ a1 
College.  Charles  Scribner’s  Sons,  New  York. 


In  dealing  with  the  Social  Compact  theory  of  the  origin  of  governme 
Dr  Woolsev  says:  “Contract  does  not  explain  the  obligation  of  subseque 
generations' to  abide  by  the  contract.  A successor  by  testament  can 
bound  to  fulfill  the  conditions  if  he  receive  the  bequest;  but  the  bindi 
force  of  a social  covenant  spends  itself  when  the  contracting  parties  d 
appear  from  the  earth.  They  are  partners,  and  the  partnership  expir 
unless  new  members  are  admitted  by  their  own  free  consent.  Mr  Jeftersc 
who  embraced  this  contract  philosophy,  felt  this  objection  so  strongly 
to  think  that,  after  nineteen  years,  when  the  majority  of  the  first  farmers 
a constitution  would  no  longer  be  living,  constitutions  ought  regularly  to 
submitted  to  the  people.  On  this  an  American  writer  remarks  that  hem 
the  life  of  states  shorter  than  that  of  a horse.  But  he  did  this  logical 

• 8 


His  error  lay  in  starting  from  the  basis  of  express  contract,  and  in  resting 
the  obligations  of  citizens  toward  the  state  on  a formal  transaction,  rather 
than  on  the  nature  of  man  and  the  necessity  of  the  state.  (Vol.  I,  pp.  191, 
192.) 

“States  have  rights  which  cannot  be  derived  from  rights  surrendered 
by  individuals.  . . Society  in  the  state-form  has  a right  over  the  lives  of 

individuals,  so  far  as,  for  instance,  to  punish  wilful  murder  capitally. 
But  the  murdered  man  certainly  did  not  give  up  his  right  to  punish  his 
murderer.  He  would  have  killed  him  if  he  could.  Nor  does  it  appear  that 
men  in  general  possess,  or  can  give  up,  a right  over  their  own  lives.  The 
right  of  punishment  does  not  rest  on  such  a flimsy  foundation.  The  trouble 
that  this  case  gave  Rousseau  is  instructive.  . . Society,  in  short,  has 

more  wisdom  and  might  than  the  sum  of  its  members,  and  much  more  than 
contending  claimants  in  a given  case.  Its  wisdom  and  might  qualify  it 
for  judgment,  and  it  brings  these  qualities  to  bear  on  all.  The  right  comes 
not  from  renounced  power  but  from  the  state's  being,  in  the  natural  order 
of  things,  God's  method  of  helping  men  towards  a perfect  life.  (Vol.  I.  p. 
195.)  “How  then  does  the  state  arise?  . . If  the  question  refers  to  the 
rational  grounds  on  which  we  can  justify  the  existence  of  an  organized 
society,  the  answer  is  found  in  the  destination  of  men,  in  their  being  so 
made  as  to  seek  society,  for  which  they  are  prepared  by  the  family  state, 
and  in  the  impossibitity  that  society  should  exist,  be  permanent  and 
prosper,  without  law  and  organization.  The  individual  could  make  nothing 
of  himself  or  of  his  rights  except  in  society;  society  unorganized  could  make 
no  progress,  could  have  no  security,  no  recognized  rights,  no  order,  no 
settled  industry,  no  motive  for  forethought,  no  hope  for  the  future.*  The 
need  of  such  an  institution  as  the  state,  the  physical  provision  for  its 
existence,  the  fact  that  it  has  appeared  everywhere  in  the  world,  unless 
in  a few  most  degraded  tribes,  show  that  it  is  in  a manner  necessary,  and 
if  necessary,  natural,  and  if  natural,  divine.”  (Vol.  I.  p.  198.) 

NOTE. — In  presenting  the  list  immediately  following  a word  of  ex- 
planation may  be  helpful.  At  the  present  time  the  popular  view  of  the 
origin  of  the  state  is  known  as  the  historical  or  evolution  view.  The 
authors  of  most  of  the  recent  works  on  political  science  hold  this  view 
in  some  form  or  other.  They  discard  the  Social  Compact  theory  in  all  its 
forms.  They  also  reject  the  theory  of  divine  origin.  But  they  mean  by 
this  the  theory  of  the  divine  right  of  kings.  They  generally  admit  that  the 
idea  of  the  state  together  with  possession  by  the  state  of  sovereign 
political,  authority  is  to  be  traced  back  to  God.  In  applying  the  theory 
of  evolution  to  the  historical  development  of  the  state  they  seek  to  trace 
the  various  steps  of  progress  whereby  the  state  has  become  what  it  is. 
It  must  be  admitted  that  the  study  of  political  science  in  the  light  of 
history  that  the  various  steps  of  progress  may  be  traced  is  perfectly 
legitimate.  But  this  study  alone  will  not  tell  us  how,  when  or  where  man 
began  to  be  a political  being  and  how  the  state  comes  to  be  Clothed  with 
authority.  Hence  many  of  the  writers  of  this  school,  in  order  to  find  a 
sure  foundation  on  which  to  rest  the  authority  of  civil  government  are 
compelled  to  trace  it  back  to  the  Divine  Author. 


Political  Science  and  Constitutional  Law.  By.  J.  W..  Burgess. 

Professor  Burgess  concedes  the  divine  origin  of  the  state  in  the 
following  sentences:  “If  the  theologian  means  by  his  doctrine  of  the 
divine  origin  of  the  state  simply  that  the  Creator  of  man  implanted  the 
substance  of  the  state  in  the  nature  of  man,  the  historian  will  surely  be 
under  no  necessity  to  contradict  him.”  “The  principle  of  the  historic 
genesis  of  the  state  .does  not  stand  opposed  to  the  doctrine  of  the  divine 
origin  of  the  state  when  that  doctrine  is  rationally  construed;  it  includes 
it  and  makes  it  the  starting  point  in  the  evolution.”  He  makes  man’s 
nature  the  “basis  and  starting  point,”  and  holds  that  “the  Creator  of  the 
nature  is,  therefore,  the  originator  of  the  subjective  state.”  (pp.  59,  62.) 

9 


Elements  of  Political  Science.  By  Stephen  Leacock,  Ph.  D.  McGill 
University,  Montreal.  Houghton  Miffin  Company,  Boston  and  New  York,  j 

After  showing  the  fallacies  of  the  Social  Compact  theory,  the  theory  : 
of  the  Divine  Right  of  kings  and  the  theory  of  force  as  explanations  of 
the  origin  of  the  State,  Professor  Leacock  sets  forth  the  Historical  or 
Evoulutionary  view.  He  shows  that  the  advocates  of  this  view  are  not 
agreed  among  themselves  as  to  the  lines  along  which  the  evolution  went 
forward  and  declares  that  “it  is  impossible  to  predicate  any  universal 
course  of  development  or  any  necessary  series  of  forms  which  it  must 
assume.”  Among  the  products  of  this  political  evolution  he  mentions 
the  separation  of  Church  and  State.  In  this  part  of  his  discussion  he 
admits  the  necessary  relation  of  the  State  and  the  moral  law.  He  says: 
“The  early  forms  of  government  were  theocratic.  The  functions  of  priest  j 
and  king  were  intermingled  or  closely  allied.  The  divine  law  was  presumed 
to  constitute  the  sanction  behind  human  enactments.  . . In  the  modern 

state,  however  generally  it  may  be  admitted  among  the  citizens  that 
legislation  ought  to  be  based  on  the  ethical  principles  of  Christianity,  the 
interpreters  of  the  divine  law,  in  the  form  of  the  priesthood,  are  not 
placed  in- a position  of  civil  authority.  The  guidance  of  the  spiritual  and 
the  political  life  of  the  community  is  in  different  hands.”  (p.  50.) 


The  State.  By  Woodrow  Wilson,  LL.  D.  D.  C.  Heath  and  Co. 

After  enumerating  and  discussing  various  theories  of  the  origin  of 
the  state  President  Wilson  says:  “Upon  each  of  these  theories,  neverthe- 
less there  evidently  lies  the  shadow  of  a truth.  Although  government 
did  not  originate  in  a deliberate  contract,  and  although  no  system  of  law 
or  of  social  order  was  ever  made  ‘out  of  hand’  by  any  man,  government 
was  not  all  a mere  spontaneous  growth.  Deliberate  choice  has  always 
played  a part  in  its  development.  It  was  not,  on  the  one  hand,  given 
to  man  readymade  by  God,  nor  was  it,  on  the  other  hand,  a human  con- 
trivance. In  its  origin  it  was  spontaneous,  natural,  twin-born  with  man 
and  the  family;  Aristotle  was  simply  stating  a fact  when  he  said,  Man  is 
bv  nature  a political  animal.’  But,  once  having  arisen,  government  was 
affected  and  profoundly  affected,  by  man’s  choice;  only  that  choice 
entered,’  not  to  originate,  but  to  modify  government.”  (p.  14.) 


The  Nature  of  the  State.  By  Westel  Woodbury  Willoughby,  Lec- 
turer in  Political  Philosophy  in  the  Johns  Hopkins  University.  Macmillan 
and  Co..  New  York. 


Professor  Willoughby  goes  much  farther  than  most  writers  in  separat- 
ing the  State  from  moral  and  religious  ideas,  but  he  can  not  bring  him- 
self to  the  point  of  denying  all  connection.  In  studying  his  discussion 
of  the  origin  of  the  State,  Chapter  III,  it  should  be . remembered  that 
his  inquiry  is  “why  in  any  particular  case  there  should  exist  in  a community 
a definite  set  of  individuals  arrogating  to  themselves  the  right  of  exercise 
of  this  divine  prerogative  of  rule.  All  that  necessarily  follows  from  the 
divine  theory  is  that  political  rule  of  some  sort  or  other  is  divinely  justified, 
(p.  52.) 


II.  WORKS  ON  JURISPRUDENCE. 


American  Law.  A Commentary  on  the  Jurisprudence,  Constitution 
and  Laws  of  the  United  States.  By  James  De  Witt  Andrews.  Callaghan  and 
Company,  Chicago. 


10 


A few  short  quotations  relating  to  the  personality  of  the  State,  and  to 
religious  instruction  in  the  public  schools,  are  here  given: 

“The  State  or  society  is  the  necessary  and  normal,  i.  e.,  natural  whole, 
of  which  men  are  parts.  It  is  therefore  an  original  rational  organism  like 
reason  itself,  an  original  fact,  an  essential  condition  of  human  existence.” 
(Vol.  I,  p.  5.) 

Mr.  Andrews  shows  that  the  word  person  has  two  meanings:  First, 
every  being,  artificial  or  natural,  capable  of  having  or  owing  rights.  Sec- 
ond, the  characters,  capacities,  qualities  or  positions  which  the  law 
ascribed  to  certain  men  as  individuals,  that  is,  rank,  condition,  capacity — 
status. 

“We  know  that  all  laws  emanate  from  persons,  and  also  that  they 
operate  against  or  upon  persons;  that  is,  all  law  certainly  addresses  persons. 
So  of  rights.”  (Vol.  I,  p.  81.)  He  maintains  the  personality  of  the  state 
for  the  above  reasons. 

“It  would  probably  be  safe  to  affirm  that  no  American  court  would  hold 
that  an  explanation,  incidentally  given  in  the  course  of  teaching  history  or 
literature,  if  the  tenets  of  the  Christian  religion,  Mohammedanism,  Mor- 
monism,  or  any  other  religion,  would  be  a violation  of  the  law,  and  some- 
thing must  be  left  to  the  discretion  of  those  who  are  conducting  the  schools 
and  to  the  courts  in  the  matter,  and  the  intention  with  which  an  act  is 
done,  and  the  extent  to  which  it  is  carried,  must  be  decisive  of  the  matter.” 
(Vol.  I,  p.  602.) 


Commentaries  on  the  Laws  of  England.  By  Sir  William  Blackstone. 

With  reference  to  the  Social  Compact  theory  of  the  origin  of  govern- 
ment, Blackstone  says:  “Not  that  we  can  believe,  with  some  theoretical 
writers,  that  there  ever  was  a time  when  there  was  no  such  thing  as 
society  either  natural  or  civil;  and  that,  from  the  impulse  of  reason,  and 
through  a sense  of  their  wants  and  weaknesses,  individuals  met  together 
in  a large  plain,  entered  into  an  original  contract,  and  chose  the  tallest 
man  present  to  he  their  governor.  This  notion  of  an  actually  existing 
unconnected  state  of  nature,  is  too  wild  to  be  seriously  admitted;  and 
besides  it  is  plainly  contradictory  to  the  revealed  account  of  the  primitive 
origin  of  mankind.  (Vol.  I.  p.  46.) 

Of  the  nature  of  Law  he  says:  “Considering  the  Creator  only  as  a 
being  of  infinite  power,  he  was  able  unquestonably  to  have  prescribed 
whatever  laws  he  pleased  to  his  creature,  man,  however  unjust  or  severe. 
But  as  he  is  also  a being  of  infinite  wisdom,  he  has  laid  down  only  such 
laws  as  were  founded  in  those  relations  of  justice  that  existed  in  the  nature 
of  things  antecedent  to  any  positive  precept. 

“Man,  considered  as  a creature,  must  necessarily  be  subject  to  the 
laws  of  his  Creator,  for  he  is  entirely  a dependent  being.”  “As  man  depends 
absolutely  upon  his  Maker  for  everything,  it  is  necessary  that  he  should, 
in  all  points,  conform  to  his  Maker’s  will.  This  will  of  the  Maker  is 
called  the  law  of  nature.”  “This  law  of  nature,  being  coeval  with  mankind, 
and  dictated  by  God  himself  is  of  course  superior  in  obligation  to  any 
other.  It  is  binding  over  all  the  globe  in  all  countries,  and  at  all  times; 
no  human  laws  are  of  any  validity,  if  contrary  to  this;  and  such  of  them 
as  are  valid  derive  all  their  force  and  all  their  authority,  mediately  or 
immediately,  from  this  original.”  Speaking  of  the  effect  of  sin  upon  the 
human  reason,  which  would  have  been  sufficient  had  not  man  fallen  to 
know  what  the  law  of  God  is  as  revealed  in  nature,  he  says:  “this  reason 
is  corrupt,  and  his  understanding  full  of  ignorance  and  error.  This  has 
given  manifold  occasion  for  the  benign  interposition  of  divine  Providence, 
which,  in  compassion  to  the  frailty,  the  imperfection,  and  the  blindness 
of  human  reason,  hath  been  pleased  at  sundry  times  and  in  divers  manners, 
to  discover  and  enforce  its  laws  by  an  immediate  and  direct  revelation.” 
“Undoubtedly  the  revealed  law  is  of  infinitely  more  authenticity  than  that 
moral  system  which  is  framed  by  ethical  writers,  and  denominated  the 
natural  law;  because  one  is  the  law  of  nature,  expressly  declared  so  to 


IT 


be  by  God  himself;  the  other  is  only  what,  by  the  assistance  of  human 
reason  we  imagine  to  be  that  law.  . . Upon  these  two  foundations,  the 
law  of  nature  and  the  law  of  revelation,  depends  all  human  laws;  that  is 
to  say,  no  human  laws  should  be  suffered  to  contradict  these.”  (Vol.  I, 
pp.  39-42.) 


Commentaries  on  American  Law.  By  James  Kent.  Edited  by  George 
F.  Comstock.  Little,  Brown  and  Company,  Boston. 

In  speaking  of  the  law  of  Nations  Chancellor  Kent  says:  “It  would 
be  improper  to  separate  this  law  entirely  from  natural  jurisprudence,  and 
not  to  consider  it  as  deriving  much  of  its  force  and  dignity  from  the  same 
principles  of  right  reason,  the  same  view  of  the  nature  and  constitution 
of  man,  and  the  same  sanction  of  Divine  revelation,  as  those  from  which 
the  science  of  morality  is  deduced. 

“We  ought  not,  therefore,  to  separate  the  science  of  public  law  from 
that  of  ethics,  nor  encourage  the  dangerous  suggestion,  that  governments 
are  not  so  strictly  bound  by  the  obligations  of  truth,  justice  and  humanity, 
in  relation  to  other  powers,  as  they  are  in  the  management  of  their  own 
local  concerns.  States,  or  bodies  politic,  are  to  be  considered  as  moral 
persons,  having  a public  will,  capable  and  free  to  do  right  and  wrong, 
inasmuch  as  they  are  collections  of  individuals,  each  of  whom  carries 
with  him  into  the  service  of  the  community  the  same  binding  law  of 
morality  and  religion  which  ought  to  control  his  conduct  in  private  life.  . . 
And  we  have  the  authority  of  the  lawyers  of  antiquity,  and  of  some  of 
the  first  masters  in  the  modern  school  of  public  law,  for  placing  the  moral 
obligation  of  nations  and  of  individuals  on  similar  grounds,  and  for  con- 
sidering individual  and  national  morality  as  parts  of  one  and  the  same 
science.”  (Vol.  I.  pp.  2,  3.) 


Commentaries  on  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States.  By  Joseph 
Story,  L’L.D.  Little,  Brown  and  Company,  Boston. 


In  speaking  of  .the  essential  connection  between  religion  and  the 
State  Justice  Story  said,  “The  promulgation  of  the  great  doctrines  of 
religion,  the  being  and  attributes  and  providence  of  one  Almighty  God;  the 
responsibility  to  him  for  all  our  actions,  founded  upon  moral  freedom 
and  accountability:  a future  state  of  rewards  and  punishments;  the  cultiva- 
tion of  all  the  personal,  social  and  benevolent  virtues; — these  never  can  be 
a matter  of  indifference  in  any  well  ordered  community.  It  is  indeed  diffi- 
cult to  conceive  how  any  civilized  society  can  well  exist  without  them.  . . : 

Indeed  in  a republic  there  would  seem  to  be  a peculiar  propriety  in  viewing 
the  Christian  religion  as  the  great  basis  on  which  it  must  rest  for  its  sup- 
port and  permanence  if  it  be  what  it  has  ever  been  deemed  by  its  truest 
friends,  thy  religion  of  liberty.”  In  discussing  the  meaning  of  the  first 
amendment  to  the  national  constitution  which  forbids  Congress  to  make  any 
law  respecting  an  establishment  of  a religion  or  prohibiting  the  free  exer- 
cise thereof,  he  says:  “Probably  at  the  time  of  the  adoption  of  the  consti- 
tution, and  of  the  amendment  to  it,  now  under  consideration,  the  general,  if 
not  universal  sentiment  in  America  was,  that  Christianity  ought  to  receive 
encouragement  from  the  state,  so  far  as  was  not  incompatible  with  the  pri-j 
vate  rights  of  conscience  and  the  freedom  of  religious  worship.  An  at- 
tempt to  level  all  religions,  and  to  make  it  a matter  of  state  policy  to; 
hold  all  in  utter  indifference,  would  have  created  universal  disapprobation) 
if  not  universal  indignation. 

“It  yet  remains  a problem  to  be  solved  in  human  affairs,  whether  any 
free  government  can  be  permanent  where  the  public  worship  of  God,  and 
the  support  of  religion,  constitute  no  part  of  the  policy  or  duty  of  the  state  in 
any  assignable  shape. 

“The  real  object  of  the  amendment  was,  not  to  countenance,  much  less 
to  advance  Mohammedanism,  or  Judaism,  or  infidelity,  by  prostrating  Chris- 


12 


tianity,  but  to  exclude  all  rivalry  among  Christian  sects,  and  to  prevent  any 
national  ecclesiastical  establishment,  which  should  give  to  a hierarchy  the 
exclusive  patronage  of  the  national  government.”  (Vol.  I,  pp.  661-664.) 

The  Works  of  James  Wilson,  Associate  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court 
i the  United  States,  and  Professor  of  Law  in  the  College  of  Philadelphia, 
'allaghan  and  Company,  Chicago. 

Justice  Wilson  was  one  of  the  signers  of  the  constitution  of  the 
United  States  and  ranks  among  the  foremost  authorities  on  questions  of 
jurisprudence. 

On  the  moral  personality  of  the  State  he  says:  “A  number  of  in- 
dividuals, who  have  formed  themselves  into  a society  or  state,  are,  with 
regard  to  the  purposes  of  the  society,  bound  to  consider  themselves  as 
one  moral  person,”  (Vol  I.  p.  322.) 

“Though  states  or  nations  are  considered  as  moral  persons,  yet  the 
nature,  and  essence  of  these  moral  persons  differ  necessarily,  in  many  re- 
spects, from  the  nature  and  essence  of  the  individuals  of  which  they 
are  composed.  (Vol  I.  p.  135.) 

Justice  Wilson  makes  a clear  and  proper  distinction  between  civil 
society  which  is  our  natural  state  and  existing  governments  which  are  the 
result  of  agreement.  After  combating  the  social  compact  theory  of  the 
state  with  a series  of  unanswerable  arguments,  he  says:  “To  a state  of 
society  then,  we  are  invited  from  every  quarter,  It  is  natural,  it  is  necessary 
it  is  pleasing,  it  is  profitable  to  us.  The  result  of  all  is  that  for  a state 
of  society  we  are  designated  by  Him  who  is  all-wise  and  all  good.” 


III.  COMMENTARIES  ON  THE  BIBLE. 

Only  a few  from  the  great  mass  of  Bible  commentaries  can  be  referred 
o in  this  Bibliography.  The  student  of  political  science,  however,  can  do  no 
etter  than  read  the  Bible  itself,  as  it  is  after  all  the  greatest  of  all  works  on 
(ivil  government. 

The  Psalms.  By  Carl  Bernhard  Moll,  (Lange  Series).  Scribner’s,  New 
rork. 

In  his  comments  on  the  Second  Psalm  he  says:  “The  Messiah’s  power 
over  the  Kingdom  of  God  is  destined  to  be  a divine  government,  not  only  to 
embrace  the  world,  but  also  to  conquer  the  world;  and  it  has  not  only  this 
destiny,  but  has  also  sufficient  means  in  its  own  constitution  to  accomplish 
both  of  these  purposes.  We  must  distinguish,  however,  (1)  the  means  of 
grace,  which  are  offered  previously  to  all  the  world,  the  use  of  which  con- 
veys a blessing  to  all  those  who  willingly  submit  themselves  to  him ; . . . 
and  (2)  the  powers  which  infinitely  surpass  all  the  powers  of  this  world, 
and  which  are  greatly  to  be  feared  when  they  unfold  in  their  strength  in  the 
exhibition  of  wrath,  in  the  Messianic  judgment. 

“In  the  intervening  time  the  Divine  word  addresses  itself  not  only  to 
the  lowly  and  the  weak,  but  very  emphatically  to  the  powerful  and  those  in 
high  positions  in  the  world,  who  are  in  special  danger  of  over-rating  them- 
selves and  of  boasting,  and,  in  consequence  of  this,  of  misunderstanding 
neglecting  and  transgressing  the  laws  of  the  Kingdom  of  God,  which  lie  at 
the  basis  of  all  human  order,  and  therefore  they  need  an  earnest  and  gracious 
admonition  to  be  mindful  of  their  responsibility  to  the  Heavenly  King  and 
Judge,  and  to  lead  their  subordinates  in  witnessing  faithful  obedience  to  their 
Lord  and  God,  who  not  <?nly  has  established  the  office  of  magistrate  in  the 
world  and  maintains,  protects  and  blesses  the  power  of  the  magistrate 

13 


among  men,  but  also  would  stand  in  a personal  relation  and  communion 
with  those  who  are  clothed  with  this  power,  in  order  that  the  scepter  and 
sword,  money  and  property  with  which  they  have  been  invested  by  Him, 
may  be  used  to  the  glory  of  God,  the  good  of  the  kingdom,  and  the  benefit 
of  men.” 


The  Prophet  Isaiah.  By  C.  W.  Nagelsbach.  (Lange  Series.)  Scrib- 
ners, New  York. 

The  second  chapter  is  taken  to  refer  exclusively  to  the  nations  of  the 
world.  It  speaks  of  their  receiving  instruction  in  God’s  ways  and  of  their 
walking  in  His  paths,  and  beating  their  swords  into  plowshares,  etc.  The 
author  of  the  exposition  says:  “The  consequence  o-f  this  divine  instruction, 
sought  and  received  by  the  nations,  shall  be,  that  the  nations  shall  order 
their  affairs  and  compose  their  judicial  processes  according  to  the  mind  of 
him  that  has  taught  them.  So  shall  God  appear  as  that  one  who  judges 
between  the  nations  and  awards  a (judicial)  sentence.  The  Spirit  of  God 
that  lives  in  His  word  is  a Spirit  of  love  and  peace.  The  God  of  peace 
sanctifies,  therefore,  the  nations  through  and  through,  so  that  they  no  more 
confront  one  another  in  the  sense  and  spirit  of  the  brute  power  of  this 
world,  but  in  the  mind  and  spirit  of  the  Kingdom  of  God.” 


Isaiah,  Exposition  and  Homilies.  By  Rev.  George  Rawlinson.  (Pulpit  J 
Commentary.)  A.  D.  F.  Randolph  and  Company. 

In  a homily  on  Chapter  2:6-8  he  states  as  the  theme,  “National  Judg- 
ments the  result  of  national  sins.”  In  developing  this  thought  he  says. 

* “God’s  dealings  with  Israel  are  to  be  viewed  as  a pattern  of  his  dealings 

with  nations  generally.  He  has  not  two  standards  of  right  and  wrong,  or 
two  rules  of  action  under  like  circumstances.  He  is  no  ‘respecter  of  per- 
sons.’ As  he  dealt  with  his  own  peculiar  people,  so  will  he  deal,  so  has 
he  always  dealt,  with  the  other  nations  of  the  world. 

“Every  nation  has  its  probation.  God  proved  Israel  during  the  space  of 
above  seven  hundred  years  by  the  laws  which  he  gave  them,  and  the  cir- 
cumstances in  which  he  caused  them  to  be  placed.  He  chastened  them  by 
foreign  enemies,  comforted  them  by  deliverances,  warned  them  by  his 
prophets,  afflicted  them  by  famine  and  pestilence,  gave  them  times  of  refresh- 
ing. So  long  as  there  was  any  hope  of  their  repentance  and  reformation 
he  bore  with  them,  forgave  their  transgressions,  prolonged  their  time  of  trial, 
‘destroyed  them  not.’  It  was  only  after  all  the  resources  of  his  mercy  had; 
been  exhausted,  and  there  was  no  remedy  left,  that  the  destruction  fell,  and 
the  nation  ceased  to  exist.  And  so  it  was  with  the  other  nations  of  the  earth. 
God  raised  them  up,  set  each  a work  to  do,  gave  them  laws  if  not  by  revela- 
tion at  any  rate  through  their  conscience,  and  proceeded  to  prove  them, 
whether  they  would  work  His  will  or  not.  Each  fell  in  its  turn  because  it 
rebelled  against  God,  and  persisted  in  its  rebellion,  until  God  could  suffer 
it  no  more.” 


Notes  on  the  Book  of  Daniel.  By  Albert  Barnes.  Leavitt  and  Bros., I 

New  York. 

Chapter  7 of  the  Book  of  Daniel  is  the  record  of  a vision  in  which 
the  prophet  saw  one  like  the  Son  of  Man  coming  in  the  clouds  of  heaven, 
“And  there  was  given  Him  dominion,  and  glory,  and  a kingdom,  that  all 
people,  nations  and  languages  should  serve  him;  His  dominion  is  an  ever- 
lasting dominion,  which  shall  not  pass  away,  and  His  kingdom  that  whch 
shall  not  be  destroyed.”  V.  14.  Dr.  Barnes  says  on  this  verse:  ‘The 
nature  and  the  extent  of  His  kingdom  is  designated  as  one  that  would  be 
universal  and  perpetual.”  “It  would  be  universal;  would  embrace  all 
nations.  The  language  here  is  such  as  would  emphatically  denote  univer- 
sality. It  implies  that  the  kingdom  would  extend  over  all  the  nations  of  the 
earth,  and  we  are  to  look  for  the  fulfillment  of  this  only  in  such  a universal 
reign  of  the  Messiah.” 


14 


The  Synoptic  Gospels — The  Expositor’s  Greek  Testament.  By  A.  B. 

3ruce,  D.D.  Dodd,  Mead  and  Company,  New  York. 

On  Matthew,  Chapter  28:18,  “All  authority  hath  been  given  unto  me  in 
heaven  and  upon  earth,”  Dr.  Bruce  says  that  the  term  authority  means 
“every  form  of  authority;  command  of  all  means  necessary  for  the  advance- 
ment of  the  Kingdom  of  God-.”  “The  two  phrases  (in  heaven  and  upon 
earth)  together  point  to  a universal  cosmic  dominion.  But  so  far  as  the 
earth  is  concerned,  the  dominion  is  only  a matter  of  right  or  theory,  a prob- 
lem to  be  worked  out.  Hence  what  follows,  verse  19.”  “The  commission  to 
the  Apostles  arises  out  of  the  power  claimed — all  power  has  been  given  to 
me  on  earth,  go  ye,  therefore , and  make  the  power  a reality.” 


The  Gospel  According  to  Matthew.  By  J.  P.  Tange.  Scribners,  New 

cork. 

In  commenting  on  Chapter  28:18,  (All  authority  hath  been  given  unto 
me  in  heaven  and  on  earth),  Dr.  Lange  quotes  with  approval  the  words  of 
Dr.  Meyer: 

“It  is  an  unwarranted  rationalizing  explanation  when  this  expression  is 
made  to  mean  simply,  either  the  power  of  ruling  the  minds  of  men  by  means 
of  doctrine,  or  full  power  to  make  all  the  preparations  necessary  for  the 
Messianic  theocracy.  It  is  the  kingly  office  of  Christ  without  limitation.” 


A Commentary  on  the  Gospel  of  IVIatthew.  By  E.  W.  Rice.  American 
>unday  School  Union,  Philadelphia. 

On  Matthew  28:18,  19,  the  author  says:  “It  was  something  more  than 
mere  power  that  Jesus  had  received.  It  was  the  right  to  rule.  It  included 
all  the  authority  and  privileges  and  power  of  a king  in  heaven  and  on  earth. 
He  could,  therefore,  speak  with  divine  authority.  His  commands  were 
supreme  over  the  subjects  of  his  kingdom.” 

“Disciple  all  the  nations.”  “The  Greek  does  not  imply  that  they  were 
to  go  and  make  some  disciples  out  of  all  the  nations,  but  it  implies  an  abso- 
lute command  to  make  all  the  nations  disciples  of  Jesus.” 


Commentary  on  the  Gospel  According  to  Matthew.  (The  Pulpit  Com- 
lentary  Series.)  By  Rev.  A.  L.  Williams. 

On  Chapter  28:18,  “All  authority  hath  been  given  unto  me  in  heaven 
and  on  earth,”  he  says:  “Jesus  here  asserts  that  He,  as  Son  of  man,  has 
received  from  the  Father  supreme  authority  in  heaven  and  earth,  over  the 
whole  Kingdom  of  God  in  its  fullest  sense.” 


Paul’s  Epistle  to  the  Romans.  The  Expositor’s  Greek  Testament.  By 
te  Rev.  James  Denny,  D.D.  Dodd,  Mead  and  Company,  New  York. 

On  Romans  13:1-6,  he  says:  “There  is  perhaps  nothing  in  the  passage 
which  is  not  already  given  in  our  Lord’s  words,  ‘Render  to  Caesar  the  things 
that  are  Caesar’s,  and  to  God  the  things  that  are  God’s;  yet  nothing  can  be 
more  worthy  of  admiration  than  the  soberness  with  which  a Christian  idealist 
like  Paul  lays  down  the  Divine  right  of  the  State.  The  use  made  of  the 
passage  to  prove  the  duty  of  ‘passive  obedience,’  or  the  right  divine  of  kings 
to  govern  wrong,  is  beside  the  mark;  the  Apostle  was  not  thinking  of  such 
things  at  all.  What  is  in  His  mind  is  that  the  organization  of  human  society, 
with  its  distinction  of  higher  and  lower  ranks,  is  essential  for  the  preservation 
of  moral  order,  and  therefore,  one  might  add,  for  the  existence  of  the  Kingdom 
of  God  itself;  so  that  no  Christian  is  at  liberty  to  revolt  against  that  organi- 
zation. The  State  is  of  God,  and  the  Christian  has  to  recognize  its  Divine 
right  in  the  persons  and  requirements  in  which  it  is  presented  to  him.” 

15 


Commentary  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans. 

tien,  Philadelphia. 


By  Charles  Hodge.  Mar- 


On  the  thirteenth  chapter  of  this  epistle  Dr.  Hodge  says:  “All  authority 
is  of  God.  No  man  has  any  rightful  power  over  other  men,  which  is  not 
derived  from  God.  All  human  power  is  delegated  and  ministerial.  Civil 
government  is  a Divine  institution,  1.  e.,  it  is  the  will  of  God  that  it  should 
exist  and  be  respected  and  obeyed.  While  government  is  of  God,  the  form 
is  of  men  The  obedience  which  the  Scriptures  command  us  to  render  to  our 
rulers  is  not  unlimited.  There  are  cases  in  which  disobedience  is  a duty. 


The  Epistle  of  Paul  to  the  Romans.’  By  J.  P.  Lange.  Scribners,  Xew 

York. 

On  Chapter  13:1-4,  Dr.  Lange  says:  “In  reference  to  the  civil  shorty, 
the  Apostle  evidently  makes  the  following  distinctions : ( 1 ) The  actual  exist- 
ence of  the  civil  powers,  which  are  in  every  case  an  ordinance  of  God  s 
providence,  (here  Dr.  Riddle,  of  the  Western  Theological  Seminary,  who 
prepared  supplementary  notes  for  the  American  edition  adds,  not  of  a socia 
contract,  nor  simply  by  the  will  of  the  people  ) and  the  ideal  and  rea 
existence  of  the  civil  power  which  is  not  merely  providentially  from  God  but 
is  also  by  creation  and  institution,  fundamentally  an  ordinance  appointed  by 

G°d  Dr  Riddle  says,  further,  in  his  added  notes:  “The  simple,  pelucid 
meaning  of  the  Apostle  is,  that  civil  government  is  necessary,  and  of  Divine 
appointment.  We  infer  that  anarchy  is  as  godless  as  it  is  inhuman  , tha 
magistrates  are  not  ‘the  servants  of  the  people,  nor  do  they  derive  then 
authority  from  the  people,  but  from  God,  even  though  chosen  by  the  people 
thlt  republican  officials,  no  less  than  the  hereditary  monarchs,  can  sv ibscnbc 
themselves  ‘by  the  grace  of  God.’  Unless  the  principle  be  of  universal  applica 
tion  anarchy  will  be  justified  somewhere.  This  principle,  moreover,  re 
spects  the  office,  not  the  character  of  the  magistrate;  not  the  abstrac 
authority  indeed,  but  the  concrete  rulers,  whatever  their  character.  If  1 
be  deemed  too  sweeping,  then  its  self-imposed  limitation  has  been  overlooks 
For  as  the  obedience  is  demanded  because  of  God  s appointment,  tnen  it  v 
not  demanded  in  matters  contrary  to  God’s  appointment.  When  the  uv 
power  contradicts  God’s  word  and  His  joice  in  our  conscience,  then  it  con 
tradicts  and  subverts  its  own  authority.” 

Critical  and  Exegetical  Hand-Book  to  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans.  B 

H.  A.  W.  Meyer.  Funk  and  Wahnalls,  New  York. 

On  Romans  13*1-4  Dr.  Meyer  says  that  the  word,  “There  is  no  mal 
istracv  apart  from  God, 'ex press  in  general  the  proceeding  of  all  ^agistrac 
whatever7 from  God,  and  then  this  relation  is  still  more  precisely  defined 
respect  of  those  magistracies  which  exist  in  concrete  as  a Divine  insthutio 
bv  the  appointment  of  God.  Thus  Paul  has  certainly  expressed  the  Divii 
right  of  Magistracy,  which  Christian  princes  especially  designate  by 
expression  ‘by  the  grace  of  God.’  ” 

The  Enistel  of  Paul  the  Apostle  to  the  Romans.  By  the  Right  Rev.  I 
C.  G.  Sul?  M.  Lord  Bishop  of  Durham.  University  Press,  Cambndg 

Dr  Moule  in  commenting  on  Romans,  thirteenth  chapter,  says:  “ 

but  the  existing  authorities  have  been  appointed  by  God  d e 

emphasizes  the  absolute  inalienable  Supremacy  of  God,  the  second 


16 


phasizes  the  fact  that  this  Supreme  Ruler  actually  has  constituted  subordi- 
nate authorities  on  earth,  and  that  these  authorities  are  to  be  known  in  each 
case  by  their  de  facto  existence,  and  to  be  obeyed  by  Christians  as  God’s 
present  order.” 

The  First  Epistle  of  Paul  to  the  Corinthians.  Expositor’s  Greek  Testa- 
ment. By  G.  G.  Findlay. 

In  commenting  on  Chapter  15:25-28,  he  says  that  these  verses  “reaf- 
firm, in  new  words  of  Scripture,  the  unlimited  dominion  assigned  to  Christ, 
in  order  to  reassert  more  impressively  the  truth  that  only  through  His  abso- 
lute victory  can  the  Kingdom  of  God  be  consummated.  This  subjection  of 
all  things  to  Christ  is  no  infringement  of  God’s  sovereignty  nor  alienation  of 
His  rights;  on  the  contrary,  it  is  the  means  to  their  perfect  realization.” 


Commentary  on  Ephesians.  (Pulpit  Commentary.)  By  Rev.  Prof. 
W.  G.  Blaikie,  D.D.  Anson  D.  F.  Randolph  and  Company,  New  York. 

In  a homily  on  Chapter  1 :21,  which  speaks  of  the  exaltation  of  Christ 
“far  above  all  principality,  and  power,  and  might,  and  dominion,  and  every 
name  that  is  named,  not  only  in  this  world,  but  also  in  that  which  is  to 
come,  he  says:  “As  Head  over  all  things  for  the  Church,  He  has  com- 
plete control  . . . over  all  kings  and  rulers,  heathen  and  Christian,  to 

counteract  their  opposition  or  summon  them  to  His  side.” 

Saint  Paul’s  Epistle  to  the  Colossians.  By  J.  B.  Lightfoot,  D.D., 
D:C.L.,  LL.D.  Macmillan  and  Company,  New  York. 

An  extract  is  here  given  from  his  exegesis  of  Chapter  1:16,  which  in 
describing  the  glory  of  Christ,  says:  “For  in  Him  were  all  things  created, 
in  the  heavens  and  upon  the  earth,  things  visible  and  things  invisible,  whether 
thrones,  or  dominions,  or  principalities,  or  powers;  all  things  have  been 
created  through  Him,  and  unto  Him.” 

Dr.  Lightfoot  says:  “Some  commentators  have  referred  the  terms  used 
here  solely  to  earthly  potentates  and  dignitaries.  There  can  be  little  doubt, 
however,  that  their  chief  and  primary  reference  is  to  the  orders  of  the 
celestial  hierarchy,  as  conceived  by  Agnostic  Judaizers.  . . . But  when 

this  is  granted,  two  questions  still  remain.  First — Are  evil  as  well  as  good 
spirits  included,  demons  as  well  as  angels?  And  next,  though  the  primary 
reference  is  to  spiritual  powers,  is  it  not  possible  that  the  expression  was  in- 
tended to  be  comprehensive  and  to  include  earthly  dignities  as  well?  . 

Nor  is  there  anything  in  the  terms  themselves  which  bars  such  an  extension, 
for,  as  will  be  seen,  the  combination  principalities  and  powers  is  applied  not 
only  to  good  angels  but  to  bad,  not  only  to  spiritual  powers  but  to  earthly.” 
He  paraphrases  as  follows:  “You  dispute  much  about  the  successive  grades' 
of  angels;  you  distinguish  each  grade  by  its  special  title;  you  can  tell  how 
each  order  was  generated  from  the  preceding;  you  assign  to  each  its  proper 
degree  of  worship.  Meanwhile  you  have  ignored  or  you  have  degraded 
Christ.  I tell  you,  it  is  not  so.  He  is  first  and  foremost,  Lord  of  heaven 
and  earth,  far  above  all  thrones  or  dominions,  all  principalities  or  powers, 
far  above  every  dignity  and  every  potentate — whether  angel,  or  demon,  or 
man — that  evokes  your  reverence  or  excites  your  fear.” 


The  First  Epistle  General  of  Peter.  By  G.  F.  C.  Fronmuller.  (Lange 
Series.) 

On  Chapter  3:22,  which  declares  that  “Jesus  is  on  the  right  hand  of  God, 
having  gone  into  the  heavens,  angels  and  authorities  and  powers  being  made 
subject  to  him,  he  says:”  “A  former  sufferer  is  now  exalted  to  the  highest 
dignity  of  heaven.  ...  He  has  been  received  as  sharer  of  the  Divine 
government.  He  is  not  only  King  of  His  Church,  but  of  the  whole  world.” 


17 


IV.  WORKS  ON  THEOLOGY. 


i.  Systematic  Theology.  By  Charles  Hodge,  D.D.  Scribners,  New 

York. 

In  discussing  the  matter  of  “Obedience  to  Civil  Magistrates,’”  he  says: 
“The  whole  theory  of  civil  government  and  the  duty  of  citizens  to  their 
rulers  are  comprehensively  stated  by  the  Apostle  in  Romans  13:1-5.  From 
this  it  appears  (1)  that  civil  government  is  a Divine  ordinance.  It  is  not 
merely  an  optional  human  institution;  something  which  men  are  free  to  have 
or  not  to  have,  as  they  see  fit.  It  is  not  founded  on  any  social  compact;  it  is 
something  which  God  commands;  (2)  it  is  included  in  the  Apostle’s  doctrine, 
that  magistrates  derive  their  authority  from  God;  they  are  his  ministers;  they 
represent  Him.  In  a certain  sense  they  represent  the  people,  as  they  may 
be  chosen  by  them  to  be  the  depositaries  of  this  divinely  delegated  authority; 
but  the  powers  that  be  are  ordained  by  God;  it  is  His  will  that  they  shall  be, 
and  that  they  should  be  clothed  with  authority.”  (Vol.  Ill,  p.  357.) 


Popular  Lectures  on  Theological  Themes.  By  the  Rev.  A.  A.  Hodge, 
D.D.,  LL.D.  Presbyterian  Board  of  Publication,  Philadelphia. 

Lecture  XII  is  on  “The  Kingly  Office  of  Christ.”  The  following  ex- 
tracts give  only  a faint  idea  of  the  magnificence  of  this  lecture. 

“Christ  is  already  a King  upon  His  throne  in  the  full  sweep  of  His 
kingly  administration.”  The  present  mediatorial  kingdom  of  the  God-man  is 
absolutely  universal,  embracing  the  whole  universe  and  every  department  of 
it.  The  Kingdom  of  Christ  therefore  interpenetrates  all  the  political  com- 
monwealths of  this  world,  and  all  the  political  commonwealths  of  this  world 
embrace  the  kingdom  of  Christ.  It  is  very  evident  that  it  does  not  follow 
that  the  State  has  nothing  to  do  with  religious  laws  or  obliga- 
tions. . . As  a matter  of  fact,  every  State  in  the  world  must  have, 

and  has  had,  a religion  of  some  kind.  . . . Every  Christian  must  be- 

lieve that  the  State  ought  to  be  obedient  to  the  revealed  law  of  Christ.  This 
is  so  because— (1)  the  Word  of  God  explicitly  declares  that  ‘the  powers  that 
be  are  ordained  of  God;’  that  ‘rulers  are  ministers  of  God  to  us  for  good;’ 
that  ‘whosoever  reviseth  the  power,  resisteth  the  ordinance  of  God;’  (2)  be- 
cause Christ  himself  explicitly  declared  that  to  Him  as  Mediator  all  power  in 
heaven  and  on  earth  had  been  committed.  He  is  thus  made  ‘Lord  of  lords 
and  King  of  kings;  (3)  because  the  Christian  revelation  expressed  in  the 
inspired  Scriptures  expresses  the  will  of  Christ  upon  many  subjects  in  which 
it  can  be  carried  out  only  through  the  agency  of  the  State  and  of  her  laws 
and  officers.  The  State  must  pronounce  her  will  as  to  the  rest  of  the  Sab- 
bath day,  as  to  marriage  and  divorce,  as  to  the  right  of  property  and  the 
relation  of  capital  and  labor,  as  to  capital  punishment,  and  as  to  the  educa- 
tion of  the  young.  The  ground  covered  by  these  subjects  the  State  cannot 
possibly  avoid.  And  it  is  equally  impossible  for  a Christian  man,  who  knows 
the  will  of  Christ  as  to  the  points  in  question,  to  ignore  or  disobey  that 
will  when  acting  in  the  capacity  of  a citizen  of  the  State.  If  he  does  so, 
he  is  consciously  guilty  of  direct  disloyalty  to  his  Lord.  All  intelligent 
and  honest  Christians  must  seek  to  bring  all  the  actions  of  the  political 
society  to  which  they  belong  obedient  to  the  revealed  will  of  Christ  the 
supreme  King,  the  Ruler  among  the  nations.  The  Church  and  State  are 
mutually,  entirely  independent.  The  officers  and  the  laws  of  the  one  have 
no  jurisdiction  within  the  sphere  of  the  other.  Nevertheless,  Christ  is 
the  common  King  of  each,  and  His  Bible  is  the  common  statute-book  of 
each.  ...  I charge  you,  citizens  of  the  United  States,  afloat  on 
your  wild  sea  of  politics,  THERE  IS  ANOTHER  KING,  ONE  JESUS — 
THE  SAFETY  OF  THE  STATE  CAN  BE  SECURED  ONLY  IN  THE 
WAY  OF  HUMBLE  AND  WHOLE-SOULED  LOYALTY  TO  HIS  PER- 
SON AND  OF  OBEDIENCE  TO  HIS  LAW.”  (259-287.) 

Theology  of  the  Old  Testament.  By  Dr.  Gustav  Friedrich  Oehler. 
Funk  and  Wagnalls,  New  York. 


18 


“Moral  good  is  not  realized  in  individual  life  alone,  but  also  in  the 
various  social  spheres.”  “Not  only  domestic  but  political  life,  and  well- 
ordered  civil  institutions,  are  regarded  as  component  parts  of  moral 
good.  All  earthly  authority  is  an  emanation  of  the  Divine  wisdom.  The 
view  that  kings  and  judges  are  the  organs  of  the  Divine  government  of 
the  world,  and  the  vice  regents  of  the  Supreme  Ruler  and  Judge,  and  that 
as  such  they  are  appointed  to  administer  justice,  . . . forms  the 

foundation  of  a whole  series  of  proverbs.  . . . The  prosperity  of 

a nation  depends  upon  its  possession  of  the  word  of  God.”  (P.  553.) 

Systematic  Theology.  By  A.  K.  Strong,  D.D.,  LL.D.  The  Griffith 
and  Rowland  Press,  Philadelphia. 

Dr.  Strong,  when  presenting  the  Kingly  Office  of  Christ,  says:  “This 
is  to  be  distinguished  from  the  sovereignty  which  Christ  originally  pos- 
sessed in  virtue  of  His  Divine  nature.  Christ’s  kingship  is  the  sov- 
eignty  of  the  Divine-human  Redeemer,  which  belonged  to  Him  of  right 
from  the  moment  of  His  birth,  but  which  was  fully  exercised  only  from 
the  time  of  His  entrance  upon  the  state  of  exaltation.  By  virtue  of  this 
kingly  office,  Christ  rules  over  all  things  in  heaven  and  earth,  for  the 
glory  of  God  and  the  execution  of  God’s  purpose  of  salvation.  With 
respect  to  the  universe  at  large,  Christ’s  kingdom  is  a kingdom  of 
power;  He  upholds,  governs,  and  judges  the  world.”  (Vol.  II,  p.  775.) 

Christian  Theology.  By  Milton  Valentine,  D.D.,  LL.D.  Lutheran 
Publication  Society,  Philadelphia. 

The  saving  work  of  Christ  as  King  is  quite  fully  presented  in  this 
treatise.  In  setting  forth  the  relation  between  Christ’s  Kingly  Sover- 
eignty and  the  State  or  civil  government,  he  says:  “As  the  scope  of  this 
Kingly  Sovereignty  is  far  wider  than  the  Church,  the  question  of  relation 
between  it  and  the  State  is  quite  a different  question  from  that  between 
the  State  and  the  Church.  There  may  be  independence  as  between  the 
Church  and  State,  but  not  of  the  State  with  respect  to  Christ’s  Kingly 
dominion.  A few  truths  will  make  this  evident. 

(a)  The  State  as  truly  as  the  Church  is  a Divine  institution,  and 

its  legitimate  officers  are  “God’s  ministers”  (Rom.  13:1-6).  This  is  the 
Christian  view  of  civil  government — Divine  as  truly  as  the  family,  a thing 
made  necessary  in  the  nature  of  man  and  society,  a necessity  framed 
by  God  in  the  order  of  life.  . . . Anarchy  is  not  a privilege  of 

the  race. 

( b ) Christ,  as  Mediator,  is  King  of  kings  and  Lord  of  lords,  and 
to  His  authority  every  knee  is  to  bow,  “of  things  in  heaven  and  things 
in  earth”  (Phil.  2:10;  Eph.  1:21-22;  I Cor.  25:25).  Civil  governments 
in  any  and  every  form,  are  no  more  exempted  in  their  special  spheres 

from  recognition  of  and  respect  for  God’s  authority,  plan-,  order  or  laws 

no  more  entitled  to  a divorce  from  obedience — than  any  other  activity  of 
man.  There  is  no  secularity  beneath  the  stars  that  is  absolved  from 
harmonizing  its  action  with  the  sovereignty  and  laws  of  Cod,  carried  on 
in  the  mediatorial  dominion  of  Jesus  Christ.” 

(c)  Every  nation  should  explicitly  and  practically,  in  its  own 
sphere  and  function,  acknowledge  the  Christ  of  God  as  the  Supreme 
Ruler  of  the  earth,  and  His  will  as  the  supreme  law  to  which  govern- 
mental action  should  always  be  conformed.  Otherwise  there  is  the  con- 
tradiction of  a divine  institution  in  revolt  against  God.  If  the  civil 
governments  of  the  earth,  the  most  prominent,  representative  feature  of 
human  life,  the  rulership  of  the  world,  peculiarly  determinative  of  the 
life  and  character  of  the  nation,  is  to  be  held  as  excused  from  all  recog- 
nition of,  or  practical  respect  for,  the  Divine  order,  how  is  the  harmon- 
izing of  all  things  with  that  order,  and  the  bringing  of  the  world  to 
righteousness  and  peace  ever  to  be  accomplished?  The  blight  of  many 
nations  is  that  the  secular  power  is  not  Christianized  enough  to  harmon- 
ize with  the  ideal  of  the  kingdoms  of  this  world  as  having  really  become 
‘kingdoms  of  the  Lord  and  His  Christ.’ 


19 


( d ) A1  civil  officers  should  be  men  who  recognize  Christ’s  authority 
and  who  conform  themselves  to  it  as  supreme  in  all  the  relations  of 
human  life.”(Vol.  II,  pp.  181-183.) 


V.  WORKS  SETTING  FORTH  THE  CONNECTION  BETWEEN  THE 

NATION  AND  RELIGION. 

The  United  States  a Christian  Nation.  By  David  J.  Brewer,  Associate 
Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States.  The  John  C.  Winston 
Company,  Philadelphia. 

The  first  chapter  begins  thus:  “We  classify  nations  in  various  ways, 
as,  for  instance,  by  their  form  of  government.  One  is  a kingdom,  an- 
other an  empire,  and  still  another  a republic.  Also  by  race.  Great 
Britain  is  an  Anglo-Saxon  nation,  France  a Gallic,  Germany  a Teutonic, 
Russia  a Slav.  And  still  again  by  religion.  One  is  a Mohammedan 
nation,  others  are  heathen,  and  still  others  are  Christian  nations. 

This  republic  is  classified  among  the  Christian  nations  of  the  world. 
It  was  so  formally  declared  by  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States. 
In  the  case  of  Holy  Trinity  Church  vs.  United  States,  143  U.  S.  471,  that 
court,  after  mentioning  various  circumstances,  added,  ‘these  and  many 
other  matters  that  might  be  noticed,  add  a volume  of  unofficial  declarations 
to  the  mass  of  organic  utterances  that  this  is  a Christian  nation.’ 

But  in  what  sense  can  it  be  called  a Christian  nation?  Not  in  the 
sense  that  Christianity  is  the  established  religion  or  that  the  people  are 
in  any  manner  compelled  to  support  it.  On  the  contrary,  the  Constitu- 
tion specifically  provides  that  ‘Congress  shall  make  no  law  respecting  an 
establishment  of  religion,  or  prohibiting  the  free  exercise  thereof.’ 
Neither  is  it  Christian  in  the  sense  that  all  its  citizens  are,  either  in  fact 
or  name  Christians.  On  the  contrary,  all  religions  have  free  scope  within 
our  borders.  Numbers  of  our  people  profess  other  religions,  and  many  reject 
all.  Nor  is  it  Christian  in  the  sense  that  a profession  of  Christianity  is  a 
condition  of  holding  office  or  otherwise  engaging  in  the  public  service,  or 
essential  to  recognition  either  politically  or  socially.  In  fact,  the  gov- 
ernment as  a legal  organization  is  independent  of  all  religions. 

Nevertheless  we  constantly  speak  of  this  republic  as  a Christian 
nation — in  fact,  as  the  leading  Christian  nation  of  the  world.  This  pop- 
ular use  of  the  term  certainly  has  significance.  It  is  not  a mere  creation 
of,  the  imagination.  It  is  not  a term  of  derision  but  has  a substantial 
basis — one  which  justifies  its  use.  Let  us  analyze  a little  and  see  what  is 
the  basis. 

Its  use  has  had  from  the  early  settlements  on  our  shores  and  still 
has  an  official  foundation.” 

(This  is  followed  by  a number  of  quotations  from  the  commission 
given  to  Columbus  by  Ferdinand  and  Isabelle,  the  Colonial  charters,  the 
original  compacts  of  government,  State  constitutions,  decisions  of  courts, 
etc.,  in  which  the  Christian  character  and  purpose  of  the  makers  of  the 
American  nation  is  clearly  set  forth.) 


Religion  and  Civil  Government  in  the  United  States.  By  Isaac  A.  Cor- 
nelison.  G.  P.  Putnam’s  Sons,  New  York. 

After  expressing  approval  of  the  separation  of  Church  and  State 
in  this  country,  Mr.  Cornelison  says:  “The  question  still  remains^  how- 
ever, whether  a State,  without  a Church,  is  also  without  a religion.”  The 
question  of  the  union  of  Church  and  State,  not  being  of  any  practical 
interest  in  this  country,  he  does  not  propose  to  discuss.  The  discussion 


20 


is  confined  exclusively  to  the  former  question.  He  then  gives  lengthy  quota- 
tions from  charters,  compacts  of  government,  State  constitutions,  judicial 
decisions,  etc.,  to  show  that  there  is  an  actual  connection  of  the  Nation  with 
religion.  He  maintains  that  the  Christian  amendment  of  the  National  Con- 
stitution is  unnecessary  and  that  it  cannot  be  shown  that  the  omission  of  all 
recognition  of  God  or  of  Christ  from  the  National  Constitution  was  done 
to  make  the  government  atheistic. 


Our  National  Obligation.  By  an  Attorney  at  Law.  Western  Tract 
and  Book  Society.  A Premium  Essay  which  won  the  prize  of  a Hundred  Dol- 
lars offered  in  1873  for  the  best  Essay  on  the  Religious  Amendment  to  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States. 

In  eighteen  short  chapters  the  author  maintains  a series  of  propositions 
by  which  he  leads  us  step  by  step  to  his  conclusion.  The  most  important 
of  these  propositions  are  the  following:  ‘‘All  civil  government  must,  in  the 
nature  of  things,  have  had  a divine  origin.”  (P.  17.)  “In  the  nature  of 
things  a moral  obligation  attaches  inseparably  to  the  exercise  of  civil  au- 
thority.” (P.  27.)  “As  a matter  of  fact,  there  has  always  existed  among 
men,  to  a greater  or  lesser  degree,  a general  recognition  of  a national 
moral  obligation.”  (P.  33.)  “During  the  period  of  the  Mosaic  economy, 
God  claimed  and  exercised  universal  sovereignty  over  the  nations  of  the 
earth.”  (P.  58.)  “The  Old  Testament  prophecies  represent  Christ  as 
receiving  this  universal  sovereignty,  both  over  individuals  and  nations,  by 
the  appointment  of  God  the  Father.”  (P.  70.)  “Herein  the  New  Testa- 
ment teachings  concur  with  the  prophecies  of  the  Old  Testament.”  (P.  82.) 
“The  Divine  Ruler  demands  an  explicit  acknowledgment  on  the  part  of  all 
his  subjects.”  (P.  134.)  “There  is  an  official  acknowledgment  of  the 
Divine  sovereignty  running  through  our  entire  national  history,  although 
it  is  still  defective  in  one  essential  particular.”  (P.  140.)  “The  requisite 
acknowledgment  of  Christ’s  kingly  jurisdiction  over  us  ought  to  be  embodied 
in  our  national  constitution.”  (P.  152.) 

Christian  Life  and  Character  of  the  Civil  Institutions  of  the  United 
States.  By  B.  F.  Morris.  Geo.  W.  Childs,  Philadelphia. 

The  author,  in  our  judgment,  claims  too  much  for  the  Christian  char- 
acter of  our  nation  and  government.  The  book,  however,  contains  much 
valuable  material.  He  declares  that  “This  is  a Christian  nation,  first,  in 
name;  and  secondly,  because  of  the  many  mighty  elements  of  pure  Chris- 
tianity which  have  given  it  character.”  (P.  11.) 


An  Inquiry  into  the  Moral  and  Religious  Characters  of  the  American 
Government.  New  York:  Wiley  and  Putnam,  1838. 

This  book  was  published  without  the  name  of  the  author,  but  from  in- 
formation gained  from  surviving  representatives  of  the  publishers  it  is  believed 
the  writer  was  a Judge  Warner.  It  is  a thin  volume  of  a little  more  than  two 
hundred  large  octavo  pages.  It  is  marked  by  great  logical  power,  singular 
felicity  of  diction  and  a fervent  religious  spirit.  The  author’s  concern  had 
been  awakened  by  an  attempt  made  in  both  the  New  York  and  Connecticut 
legislatures  to  abolish  the  custom  of  appointing  chaplains  who  should  offer 
prayer  regularly  during  the  sessions  and  by  the  thoroughly  irreligious  report 
in  Congress  on  certain  petition  which  had  been  presented  for  the  discontinu- 
ance of  the  national  mail  service  on  the  Lord’s  Day.  He  reviews  the  pro- 
visions relating  to  religion  in  the  Federal  constitution  to  show  that  they  do 
not  necessarily  impose  on  the  nation  an  irreligious  character.  He  reviews  the 


21 


original  State  Constitution,  and  the  course  of  State  and  national  legislation,  to 
prove  the  Christian  purpose  of  the  founders  of  the  nation,  and  concludes  the 
treatise  with  these  words : 

“God  preserves  us;  we  must  go  back;  we  must  reform  our  political 
administrations  on  the  point  of  their  moral  principles.  . . . We  must 

retrace  our  steps,  retrieve  our  errors,  regain  the  position  we  have  lost.  Let 
us  dig  up  the  burned  standard  of  the  fathers  and  fashion  ourselves  anew  by 
it;  let  us  return  to  the  primary  spirit  of  the  government  ere  the  doom  of  the 
nations  that  forget  God  become  our  own.” 


VI.  MODERN  MISSIONARY  LITERATURE. 

This  very  large  and  rapidly  growing  department  of  literature  deserves 
much  fuller  notice  than  can  here  be  given  it.  The  great  enterprise  of  modern 
missions  has  been  compelled  to  study  the  relation  of  government  to  religion. 
It  stands  face  to  face  with  the  ruin  wrought  by  sin  in  national  life, as  in  every 
other  department  of  human  life,  and  it  cannot  but  ask  whether  the  salvation 
wrought  by  Christ  meets  this  as  it  mets  other  human  neds.  And  the  answer 
of  missionary  leaders  and  workers  the  world  over  is  singularly  unanimous. 
The  dream  of  secularism  that  a nation  can  live  a safe  and  beneficent  life  apart 
from  God  and  from  Jesus  Christ  is  not*  the  idea  of  the  missionary  forces.  We 
could  fill  pages  with  quotations  in  proof  of  this  statement,  but  content  our- 
selves with  a few  extracts  from  two  books  by  two  of  the  most  eminent 
missionary  leaders  of  today. 


Christian  Missions  and  Social  Progress.  A Social  Study  of  Foreign 
Missions.  By  the  Rev.  James  S.  Dennis.  Two  volumes.  Fleming  M.  Revell 
Company,  New  York  and  Chicago. 

This  great  work  consists  of  two  series  of  lectures  delivered  at  Princeton 
in  1893  and  1896.  The  purpose  of  the  author  is  plainly  indicated  by  the  title 
of  the  work.  A few  extracts  will  show  in  some  measure  the  line  or  argu- 
ment followed.  These  extracts  are  all  from  Vol.  I,  p.  61. 

“Christian  missions,  according  to  every  fair  and  proper  criterion,  have 
long  since  fully  vindicated  their  claim  to  be  ranked  as  a religious  force  in 
the  world.  Are  they  also  a humanizing  ministry?  They  touch  and  trans- 
form individual  lives.  Do  they  also  reach  and  influence  society  as  a whole? 

We  know  that  they  teach  a new  religion  of  the  heart.  Do  they 

also  advocate  and  seek  to  establish  a more  refined  moral  code  for  the 

domestic,  social,  commercial,  philanthropic,  and  even  national  life  of  man- 
kind? (P.  23.)  “It  cannot  be  said  that  this  is  indeed  a new  conception  of 
their  import  when  we  consider  the  historic  relation  of  Christianity  to  human 
progress;  yet  it  comes  to  many  of  us  with  a certain  freshness,  simply  be- 
cause its  identification  with  the  scope  and  purpose  of  modern  missions  has 
been  allowed  to  lapse  to  an  unwarrantable  extent.”  (P.  24.)  “The  study 
of  the  social  evils  of  the  non-Christian  world  has  emphasized  the  necessity 
for  an  adequate  remedy.  Here  we  deal  with  a vital  point  in  our  dis- 
cussion. If  a remedy  is  needed,  then  it  is  essential  that  it  be  the  right  one. 
We  must  scrutinize  with  care  all  proposals  intended  to  provide  relief  and 
guarantee  improvement.”  (P.  355.)  “Education  alone,  apart  from  Chris- 
tianity, will  not  accomplish  it.  It  is  not  in  itself  a moral  force.  In  fact,  if 
it  is  out  of  touch  entirely  with  Christianity,  it  often  becomes  a powerful 
weapon  of  evil  and  may  be  subsidized  in  violent  hostility  to  the  higher  wel- 
fare of  society.”  (P.  357.)  “The  mere  introducing  of  these  Asiatic  em- 
pires into  the  sisterhood  of  nations,  still  less  the  introduction  of  western 

facilities  and  inventions,  or  the  exchange  of  Oriental  for  Occidental  com- 


22 


modities,  will  not  touch  the  real  seat  of  the  trouble.”  (P.  365.)  “Is  civi- 
lization divorced  from  Christianity  a panacea  in  Africa?  In  the  case  of  the 
Kaffirs,  one  of  the  most  promising  of  the  South  African  races,  it  has  been 
made  manifest  that  the  adoption  of  so-called  civilization  without  Crhistian- 
ity  has  produced  the  most  lamentable  results,  while  the  acceptance  of  Chris- 
tianity has  invariably  opened  up  to  them  a bright  and  progressive  career.” 
(P.  366.)  “We  have  heard  much  of  what  has  been  called  the  ‘Gospel  of 
Commerce,’  . . . but,  taking  the  world  as  it  is,  commerce  may  be 

simply  a school  of  fraud  deceit,  and  selfishness.  It  may  illustrate  the  worst 
aspects  of  unscrupulous  greed  and  grieviously  misrepresent  the  moral 
force  in  social  life.  . . . Christianity  brings  new  energies,  new 

ideals,  and  new  hopes,  true-hearted,  and  pure — is  the  ultimate  solution  of 
social  evils  and  the  sure  promise  of  a redeemed  society,  fashioned  at  last  into 
the  likeness  of  Christ.”  (Pp.  163,  164.) 

Christianity  and  the  Nations.  By  Robert  E.  Speer.  Fleming  H.  Revell 
Company.  1910. 

In  the  fourth  chapters  of  this  book,  entitled  “Missions  and  Politics/’  Mr. 
Speer  says : 

“As  light  breaks  on  the  difficult  problems  of  Church  and  State  at  home, 
and  our  governments  become  in  a deeper  and  more  real  sense  Christian, 
they  will  express  their  Christian  character  to  other  nations.  If  our  govern- 
ments are  purely  secular,  of  course  they  can  have  none  but  a secular  mes- 
sage to  utter;  but  if,  as  we  believe,  they  are  meant  to  be  in  a noble  sense 
religious  and  Christian,  then  their  Christian  character  will  lnd  utterance  as 
the  Christian  character  of  John  Lawrence’s  government  did  in  the  Punjab.” 


VII.  WORKS  TREATING  OF  PUBLIC  EDUCATION. 

The  Bible  in  the  Public  Schools.  Arguments  in  the  case  of  John  D. 
Minor  and  others  vs.  the  Board  of  Education  of  the  City  of  Cincinnati.  Robert 
T.  Clark  and  Co.,  Cincinnati. 

The  addresses  by  the  attorneys  in  support  of  the  use  of  the  Bible  in  the 
Schools  of  Cincinnati  are  very  valuable  as  setting  forth  the  need  the  State  has 
of  religion.  Only  one  or  two  extracts  need  be  given.  In  the  course  of  his 
argument  George  R.  Sage  said:  “Religion  is  recognized  by  the  constitu- 
tion itself  as  the  bond  of  society,  the  basis  on  which  our  institutions  rest, 
and  essential  to  good  government  and  the  safety  of  the  State.”  (P.  155.) 

The  Superior  Court  of  Cincinnati,  before  which  the  case  was  tried, 
rendered  its  decision  in  favor  of  the  use  of  the  Bible.  Judge  Hagans,  in 
announcing  this  decision  said:  “We  shall  find  that  religion  of  some  sort 
was  always  a necessary  adjunct  of  the  State,  furnishing  both  bonds  and 
sanctions,  as  the  pledges  of  its  safety  and  perpetuity.”  (P.  362.) 

Moral  Education.  By  E.  H.  Griggs.  B.  W.  Huebsch,  New  York. 

“To  appreciate  the  literature,  sculpture,  painting,  action,  and,  indeed, 
all  expressions  of  life  during  these  Christian  centuries,  a knowledge  of  the 
basal  sources  of  the  Christian  religion  is  essential.  Consider,  for  instance, 
how  necessary  a knowledge  of  the  Bible  is  to  the  appreciation  of  half  the 
paintings  in  any  European  gallery.  As  the  Bible  is  the  great  text-book  of 
Christianity,  so  it  is  the  source  from  which  much  of  our  civilization  can  be 
explained.”  (P.  281.) 


23 


Moral  Training  in  the  Public  Schools.  The  California  Prize  Essays.  By 
C.  E.  Rugh,  T.  P.  Stevenson,  E.  D.  Starbuck,  Frank  Cramer  and  George  E. 

Meyers. 

A single  quotation  will  be  given,  and  this  from  the  essay  by  Dr.  Steven- 
son: “The  secular  program  of  education  does  not  meet  the  needs  of  the 
nation.  The  nation  needs  a law-abiding  citizenship,  a people  who  will  yield 
obedience  to  the  laws,  not  merely  as  a matter  of  compulsion  or  to  avoid 
their  penalties,  but  for  conscience’  sake.  To  prepare  for  such  obedience 
the  citizen  must  not  only  know  the  law,  but  must  know  and  approve  the 
reasons  which  underlie  the  law.  But  the  main  reason  which  underlies 
many  of  our  laws  is  a religious  reason;  for  example,  our  laws  against 
blasphemy  and  perjury  are  based  on  reverence  due  to  the  name  of  God.” 
(P.  71.) 


Moral  Instruction  and  Training  in  Schools.  Report  of  an  International 
Inquiry.  Two  volumes.  Edited  on  behalf  of  the  committee  by  M.  E.  Sadler. 
Longmans,  Green  and  Company,  London  and  New  Yotk.  1908. 

The  Introduction  states  that  “The  influence  of  education  upon  conduct 
and  character  is  the  subject  discussed  in  this  book/’  Its  chapters  are  the  out- 
come of  an  inquiry  undertaken  with  the  purpose  of  gathering  information  as 
to  the  methods  of  moral  instruction  and  training  now  in  use  in  schools  in 
different  countries.”  (P.  13.) 

Chapter  7 takes  up  “the  Religious  foundation  of  Moral  instruction,”  and 
declares  it  to  be  the  consensus  of  opinion  of  leading  educators  in  the 
world  today  that  moral  instruction  cannot  be  severed  from  religion.  It  is 
stated  that  if  the  investigation  had  been  made  a generation  ago  the  verdict 
would  doubtless  have  been  different,  but  that  now,  “The  general  result  of 
new  currents  of  thought  and  feeling  has  been  to  give  a fresh  stimulus  to  the 
belief  in  the  unseen  in  all  its  forms,  which  is  the  essence  of  religion  and 
more  particularly  to  the  conviction  that  ethical  and  social  ideas  must  fail  of 
their  full  power  over  the  heart  and  will  unless  they  are  connected  with  this 
fundamental  belief.”  (Vol.  I,  p.  68.)  , , 

Of  education  in  the  United  States  it  is  said  that  its  chief  end  is  “to 
prepare  our  children  for  good  citizenship.  It  is  denied  that  our  public 
schools  are  ‘Godless,’  but  that  their  chief  aim  is  to  develop  noble  manhood 
and  womanhood.  (Vol.  II,  pp.  258,  258.)  , 


Education  in  Religion  and  Morals.  By  George  Albert  Coe,  Ph.D. 
Fleming  H.  Revell,  Company,  Chicago,  New  York  and  Toronto.  (1904.) 

In  the  Preface  the  author  points  out  the  importance  of  the  moral  and 
religious  training  of  the  young  if  we  are  to  secure  the  moral  health  of  society. 
He  then  takes  uo  the  theory  of  education,  next  the  child,  and  next  the  institu- 
tions by  which  the  child  is  to  be  educated.  These  he  enumerates  thus ; 

“The  family,  the  Sunday  School,  Societies  and  Clubs,  Christian  Acad- 
emies and  Colleges,  and  State  Schools.” 

In  the  discussion  of  the  last  topic  he  says:  “That  State  schools  should 
make  good  citizens,  and  that  good  citizenship  depends  upon  good  character, 
all  are  agreed.  As  to  the  relation  of  State  schools  to  religion,  there  is  con- 
fusion in  both  theory  and  practice.  In  all  this  confusion,  however,  the  cen- 
tral issue  concerns  the  kind  of  life  that  we  wish  the  children  to  grow  into. 
The  contradiction  between  the  religion  and  the  secularist  view  of  life  is 
fundamental  and  irreconcilable.  In  our  schools we  must  sim- 

ply choose  between  the  two  views.  Religion  or  irreligion  is  present  in 
the  schools  just  as  surely  as  teachers  are  present.  The  notion  that  the 


24 


State  school  can  be  strictly  neutral  with  respect  to  the  great  problem  of  life 
and  destiny  is  simply  illusory.  It  it  incumbent  upon  us  to  take  one  side  or 
the  other.  This  does  not  necessarily  imply  instruction  in  dogma.”  (Pp. 
348,  358.) 

The  Philosophy  of  Education.  By  Herman  Harrell  Horne.  The  Mac- 
millan Company,  New  York.  (1907.) 

The  writer  speaks  in  strong  terms  of  the  necessity  of  Bible  knowledge 
and  says  that 

“Public  opinion  today  is  strong,  but  not  unanimous,  in  supporting  the 
reading  of  the  Bible,  without  note  or  comment,  in  our  public  schools.” 
(P.  126.) 


VIII.  CHRISTIAN  ETHICS. 

Social  Ethics.  By  James  Melville  Coleman.  The  Baker  a-nd  Taylor 
Company,  New  York. 

The  steps  in  the  delegation  of  authority  and  the  general  rules  govern- 
ing the  use  of  authority  are  as  follows:  God  delegates  authority  to  Jesus 
Christ;  Jesus  Christ  delegates  authority  to  the  Organic  People  (the  State); 
the  State  delegates  authority  to  the  government;  the  government  delegates 
authority  to  officials,  municipalities  and  corporations.  With  every  delega- 
tion of  authority  a law  is  prescribed  to  govern  its  exercise;  when  authority 
is  received,  recognition  should  be  made  of  the  obligation  of  the  agency 
conferring  the  authority;  in  the  recognition  of  authority  no  intermediate 
agencies  should  be  passed  over. 

In  the  administration  of  political  authority  these  rules  are  applied  with 
the  exception  that  “At  one  particular  point  is  failure  to  be  noted,  when 
the  State  refuses  to  confess  the  dependence  of  the  social  will  upon  the  will 
of  Jesus  Christ,  and  thus  interfere  with  the  cosmic  philosophy  of  the  divine 
plan.” 

A System  of  Moral  Science.  By  Laurens  P.  Hickok,  D.D.,  LL.D.  Re- 
vised with  the  co-operation  of  Julius  H.  Seelye,  D.D.,  LL.D  Ginn,  Heath  and 
Company,  Boston. 

Almost  a hundred  pages  of  this  work  are  given  to  the  discussion  of 
civil  government.  The  author  says  that  “The  State  is  in  no  sense  a human 
product;  though  found  wherever  man  is  found,  man  no  more  makes  the 
State  than  he  makes  himself.”  “The  theory  of  a voluntary  compact  is  a 
mere  figment.  ...  No  State  ever  thus  originated.”  (P.  112,  113.) 
“While  government  is  a necessity  for  the  State,  and  may  righteously  en- 
force its  enactments,  it  by  no  means  follows  that  every  government  is  neces- 
sary or  righteous.  We  are  not  bound  to  obey  because  some  have  as- 
sumed to  command,  nor  because  they  have  acquired  power  to  crush 
resistance.  This  power  may  still  be  usurpation  and  tyranny.  On  the 
other  hand,  authority  may  constrain  conscience  as  a duty  without  the  appli- 
cation of  its  power.  Even  when  the  rightness  of  the  precept  is  not  at  all 
apprehended,  the  naked  will  of  sovereignty  is  enough  to  fix  obligation,  but 
it  must  be  sovereignty  standing  on  right  authority.  This  is  where  the 
principles  of  moral  science  reach  to  the  very  foundation  of  all  civil  govern- 
ment.” (P.  121.)  The  State  “may  not  legislate  in  violation  of  pure 
morality.  . . . When  civil  authority  attempts  to  break  over  the  bar- 
riers of  moral  right,  and  command  anything  which  it  would  be  unworthy 
of  man  to  perform,  it  nullifies  its  own  authority  by  running  against  the 
ultimate  test  of  all  authority,  and  can  only  provoke  contempt  and  universal 
Divine  authority.  . . . God  is  the  rightful  sovereign  of  all  sovereign- 

ties, ‘the  King  of  kings  and  the  Lord  of  lords.’”  (P.  127.) 


25 


A Handbook  of  Christian  Ethics.  By  J.  Clark  Murray,  LL.D.  McGill 

University,  Montreal.  T.  & T.  Clark,  Edinburgh. 

The  State  with  the  legal  code  by  which  it  is  realized,  is,  in  a very  real 
sense,  a divine  institution.  It  forms  an  organized  embodiment  of  the  high- 
est  revelation  of  God,  that  a nation  has  been  able  to  attain  in  its  national 
life.  Accordingly  it  becomes  one  of  the  primary  obligations  of  the  indi- 
vidual to  the  State  to  work  for  the  improvement  of  its  legal  code.” 

System  of  Christian  Ethics.  By  A.  Dorner.  T.  & T.  Clark,  Edinburgh. 

The  idea  of  right  is  central  in  the  State  and  involves  its  divine  origin 
Justice  necessitates  a Christian  State.  “The  principle  of  the  State  is  the 
idea  of  right.  For  the  idea  of  right  establishes  the  divine  origin  of  the 
State,  and  excludes  that  theory  of  it  according  to  which  it  is  based  orig- 
inally upon  contract.  And  in  the  idea  of  right  we  have  the  inward  bond  I 
that  connects  the  State  with  religion.  For  among  the  various  religions  it  is 
the  Christian  alone  that,  by  its  history,  has  given  the  State  a safe  guarantee 
that  it  will  exercise  a blessed  influence  on  its  citizens.”  (Pp.  558,  559,  580.) 

Christian  Ethics.  By  D.  G.  Gregory,  D.D.,  LE.D. 

In  treating  of  the  State,  Dr.  Gregory  ably  maintains  its  divine  origin  ■ 
moral  character  and  subordination  to  Divine  law. 

Christian  Ethics  (Social).  By  H.  Martensen.  T.  & T.  Clark  Company 

. The  relation  between  the  institution  of  the  State  by  God  and  its  consti- 
tution  by  man  is  admirably  expressed.  “Christianity  has  prescribed  no 
definite  form  of  constitution,  from  which  fact,  however,  it  must  not  be 
inferred  that  it  regards  this  as  a matter  of  indifference.  It  has  expressly 
taught  us  only  that  the  State  is  a divine  ordinance,  and  that  the  source  of 
plempotence  or  sovereignty  must  be  sought  in  God.  The  State,  although 
certainly  to  be  regarded  as  a human,  is  nevertheless  in  its  inmost  nature  a 
divine  institution,  invested  by  God  with  the  highest  earthly  power*  and 
rulers  are  the  organs  for  exercising  this  power,  a fact  which  does  not 
however,  exclude  the  co-operation  of  the  people.”  (Pages  183-185  ) 


IX.  SOCIOLOGY  AND  THE  SOCIAL  PROBLEM. 

Principles  of  Social  Science.  By  H.  C.  Carey.  In  three  volumes.  J. 

B.  Lippincott  Company.  * 

“Nations  can  permanently  prosper  only  as  they  obey  the  golden  rule  of 
Christianity;  and  when  they  fail  to  do  so,  Nemesis  never  fails  to  claim  her 
rights.”  (Vol.  I,  p.  422.) 

Social  Aspects  of  Religious  Institutions.  By  Edwin  L.  Earp.  Eaton 

and  Mains,  New  York. 

The  author  in  the  outset  declares  that  “The  Christian  religion  has 
pre-eminently  a social  aim.  (P.  4.)  He  says  further:  “The  need  for 
religious  social  organization  must  be  considered  from  the  viewpoint  of  a 
world  problem  which  Christianity  hopes  to  solve.  The  ideals  of  religion 
which  have  in  view  the  world-wide  kingdom  of  redeemed  humanity  can 
never  be  realized  so  long  as  there  are  great  nations  representing  different 

26 


civilizations  that  are  backed  by  military  power  and  economic  and  indus- 
trial efficiency  without  the  Christian  ideal.”  (Pp.  29,  30.) 


Social  Facts  and  Forces.  By  Washington  Gladden.  G.  P.  Putnam’s 
Sons,  New  York. 

In  this  work  Dr.  Gladden  deals  with  the  various  social  problems  of 
the  day  with  a view  to  discover  how  the  well-being  of  the  people  is 
affected  by  the  changes  taking  place  in  industrial  life.  In  speaking  of 
the  sphere  of  the  State  he  asks:  “Has  society  provided  itself  with  no 
means  of  realizing  this  unity  which  is  the  very  condition  of  its  existence?” 
He  says  that  “the  State,  we  might  think  is  such  an  agency,”  and  he  adds: 
“I  am  disposed  to  believe  that  the  State,  if  rightly  conceived  and  adminis- 
tered%  would  perform  this  service.  The  State,  in  the  true  conception  of  it, 
is  the  union  of  all  for  the  common  good.”  But  he  deprecates  the  fact 
that  the  State  is  viewed  generally  as  a police  power  and  nothing  more, 
“and  it  accentuates  the  antagonisms  rather  than  the  unities  of  society.” 
Let  me  say  again  that  this  conception  of  the  chief  function  of  the  State  is  a 
wholly  erroneous  conception  that  the  State  is  something  higher  and  more 
God-like  than  this,  and'  that  if  we  could  only  invest  it  in  our  thoughts  with 
its  true  divine  character,  we  should  need  no  other  agency  for  the  unification 
of  society.”  (P.  201-203.) 

Social  Solutions  in  the  Light  of  Christian  Ethics.  By  Thomas  C.  Hall. 
Eaton  and  Mains,  New  York;  Jennings  and  Graham,  Cincinnati. 

This  work  is  designed  to  throw  light  on  the  social  message  of  Jesus 
Christ.  In  speaking  of  the  sphere  of  civil  government  and  the  obedience 
it  may  rightly  claim,  he  says.  ’Government  can  claim  our  respect  and 
loyalty  only  in  so  far  as  its  agents  are  ‘ministers  of  God’s’  Divine  order. 
We  must  confess  that  neither  America,  England,  nor  Germany,  nor  any 
existing  government,  is  really  Christ’s  kingdom.  All  are  built  upon  force. 
In  none  of  them  is  God’s  will  done  as  in  heaven.  In  all  of  them  intem- 
perance, prostitution,  violence,  and  corruption  mark  the  character  of  the 
social  order,  even  if  in  less  degree  than  in  ancient  Rome.  The  teachings 
of  Jesus  today  are  still  revolutionary.  We  could  not  make  Matthew’s 
constitution  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven  (Sermon  on  the  Mount)  the  statute 
law  of  the  United  States  without  an  entire  change  in  our  government, 
both  in  its  purpose  and  machinery.  All  State  complicity  in  intemperance, 
prostitution  and  violence  must  cease.  . . . The  government  must 
become  the  expression  of  God’s  love,  shed  abroad  in  our  streets,  market 
places,  and  places  of  amusement.”  (Pp.  23-25.)  “The  moralization  and 
not  the  abolishment  of  government,  is  the  goal.”  (P.  153.) 

The  Political  and  Social  Significance  of  the  Life  and  Teaching  of  Jesus. 

Bv  Jeremiah  W.  Jenks.  Young  Men’s  Christian  AssociatiomPress,  New  York 

The  author  says:  “The  best  government  is  that  which  best  serves  the 
people.  . . . Through  no  revolutionary  process,  no  arrogant  assump- 

, tion  of  control  by  any  one  person  believing  himself  to  have  exclusive  insight 

into  God’s  plans  for  progress,  through  no  merely  selfish  struggle  for  rights, 
in  which  duties  to  society  are  forgotten,  but  by  slow  growth  to  purer  forms 
of  political  action  as  the  life  of  the  nation  comes  into  higher,  nobler  phazes, 
will  government  reflect  the  Christianity  of  its  people  and  grow  ever  better  as 
individual  faith  stirs  to  eternal  vigilance.”  (P.  69.) 

The  Church  and  Her  Prophets,  By  E.  D.  Marvin.  Broadway  Pub- 
ishing  Company,  New  York. 

“Gradually  reformers  are  coming  to  a deep  conviction  that  there  is  no 
force  that  can  efficiently  regenerate  human  nature  and  make  men  morally 

27 


great,  save  that  which  is  manifest  by  the  presence  of  Christ  in  the  life;  anc  I 
that  He,  and  He  alone,  is  the  divinely  appointed  leader  in  social,  com-'  1 
^nercial  and  political  improvements.”  (Pp.  42,  43.) 

Jesus  Christ  and  the  Social  Question.  By  Prof.  F.  G.  Peabody.  Grosser; 
and  Dunlap,  New  York. 

Because  the  state  with  its  government  is  often  in  the  hands  of  a class! 
who  wield  its  powers  in  behalf  of  their  own  selfish  interests,  there  are  many] 
who  think  that  it  ought  to  be  abolished,  or  at  least  so  transformed  as  tc 
change  completely  its  purpose  and  activities.  Professor  Peabody  puts  thej 
question  in  this  form  as  coming  from  the  discontented  class.  “Is  not  the] 
institution  of  the  state,  in  its  present  form,  a mere  instrument  of  the  privi- 
leged class,  and  must  it  not  be  supplanted  by  a co-operative  commonwealth! 
of  collective  ownership?  In  discussing  the  attitude  of  Jesus  toward  the) 
social  question  he  says:  “There  was  political  oppression  about  him  to  be 
remedied;  there  were  social  uprighteousness  and  iniquity  to  be  condemned;! 
but  Jesus  does  not  fling  himself  into  these  social  issues  of  his  time.  He 
moves  through  them  with  a strange  tranquility,  not  as  one  who  is  indif- 
ferent to  them,  but  as  one  whose  eye  is  fixed  on  an  end  in  which  these 
social  problems  will  find  their  own  solution.”  Professor  Peabody  compare? 
the  social  teachings  of  Jesus  to  the  by-product  of  applied  science.  In  this 
he  is  undoubtedly  wrong,  since  the  kingdom  was  the  great  end  for  which  he 
labored  and  suffered. 


Christianity  and  the  Social  Crisis.  By  Walter  Rauschenbusch.  Thej 
Macmillan  Company,  New  York. 

In  the  introduction  to  this  work  the  author  says  that  “Western  civiliza- 
tion is  passing  through  a social  revolution  unparalleled  in  history  for  scope 
and  power.”  In  speaking  of  the  sphere  of  the  State  and  what  may  be  done 
through  political  agencies  in  the  solution  of  our  vexatipus  social  problems  he 
says:  “The  State  is  the  organization  through  which  men  co-operate  for  the 
larger  social  ends.  If  men  conceived  of  political  duties  as  a high  religious 
service  to  man  and  to  God,  the  State  can  be  a powerful  agent  in  the  bettering 
of  human  life.”  “Ideally,  the  State  is  the  organization  of  the  people  for 
their  larger  common  interests.  Actually,  all  States  have  been  organizationss 
of  some  section  of  the  people  to  protect  their  special  interests  against  the 
rest.  Ideally,  the  chief  function  of  the  State  should  be  the  maintenance  of 
justice.  Actually  the  chief  function  of  the  State  has  been  the  maintenance  of 
existing  conditions,  whatever  they  happen  to  be.”  “Nothing  better  could 
happen  to  any  State  than  to  have  within  it  a Church  devoted,  not  to  its 
own  corporate  interests,  but  to  the  moral  welfare  of  humanity,  and  nudging 
the  reluctatn  State  along  like  an  enlightened  pedagogue.”  (Pp.  183-187.) 


God  and  Government,  or  Christ  Our  King  in  Civic  and  Social  Right- 

ousness.  By  J.  Martin  Rohde.  Eaton  and  Maines,  New  York. 

This  book  is  highly  commended  by  the  late  Bishop  McCabe,  and  toy 
the  Hon.  A.  C.  Matthews,  ex-Speaker  of  the  House  of  Representatives  of 
Illinois,  and  former  Comptroller  of  the  United  States  Treasury. 

In  the  first  chapter  the  author  says:  “Individual  Christianity  and 
State  atheism  are  two  things  so  entirely  at  variance  with  each  other  that 
both  cannot  consistently  be  component  parts  of  one  and  the  same  character. 
The  true  Christian  faith  is  largely  and  necessarily  a theocratic  faith,  a faith 
which  acknowledges  divine  rulership  in  all  national  affairs.”  (P.  15.)  “Our 
Republic  should  seek  to  be  an  ideal  Christian  nation  by  recognizing  the 
importance  and  the  pre-eminence  of  Gospel  precepts  and  principles  in  public 
affairs  and  in  national  life.  Indeed,  inasmuch  as  it  is  evident  that  all 
King  Immanuel’s  providential  dispensations  are  in  harmony  with  human 


28 


happiness  and  well-being,  all  nations  should  acknowledge  his  sovereignty 
and  endeavor  to  be  accounted  worthy  in  the  Lord’s  great  day  to  join  God’s 
mighty  host  in  the  great  thundering  chorus  of  eternity.  ‘Hallelujah,  the  Lord 
God  omnipotent  reigneth.’  ” 

Mr.  Rohde  does  not  think  the  acknowledging  of  Christ  formally  in  the 
national  constitution  is  absolutely  necessary  to  make  the  nation  Christian, 
but  he  holds  that  it  would  be  a proper  act  of  reverence.  He  says:  “While 
it  is  certainly  true  that  a literal  recognition  of  Christ  as  the  head  of  the 
nation  and  a formal  declaration  of  his  gospel  as  the  fundamental  teaching 
on  which  all  legislation  should  be  based  would  not  be  out  of  place  and 
could  do  no  harm,  . . . yet  it  must  be  conceded  that  such  a mere  form 

of  words  alone  have  little  or  no  significance  or  influence  in  Christianizing 
our  people.”  (P.  34.) 

“But  regardless  of  such  a verbiage  of  our  national  code  the  doctrine  of 
the  divine  origin  and  authority  of  the  State  cannot  be  denied  and  must,  by- 
all  means,  be  maintained.  Plutarch  has  well  said:  ‘There  has  never  been  a 
State  of  atheists.  You  may  travel  over  the  world;  you  may  find  cities  with- 
out walls,  without  a king,  without  a mint,  without  theaters  or  gymnasiums; 
but  you  will  never  find  a city  without  a god,  without  prayer,  without  oracles, 
without  sacrifice.  Sooner  may  a city  stand  without  foundations  than  a State 
without  belief  in  the  gods.  This  is  the  bond  of  all  society,  the  pillar  of  all 
legislation.’  Thus  a significant  religious  impulse  recognizing  a higher 
power  in  all  law  and  authority  wonderfully  pervades  all  mankind.”  (P.  35.) 

“The  clearest  and  strongest  minds,  from  Plato  to  Paul  and  from  Paul  to 
the  sages  of  the  present  day,  have  believed  and  declared  that  God  is  the 
author  and  source  of  all  law  and  authority. 

“Confirming  this  unanimity  of  opinion,  we  have  the  inspired  declara- 
tion, “There  is  no  power  but  of  God;  the  powers  that  be  are  ordained  of 
God.’” 

“Therefore,  in  all  government,  whether  the  forms  of  administration  be 
autocratic,  monarchical,  or  democratic,  we  should  recognize  the  authority  of 
the  one  Great  Unseen  Lawgiver  by  whom  kings  rule  and  princes  decree 
justice.”  (P.  36.) 


The  Social  Application  of  Religion.  By  Charles  Stelzle,  Jane  Addams, 
Charles  P.  Neill,  Graham  Taylor  and  George  P.  Eckman.  Jennings  and 
Graham,  Cincinnati. 

Herbert  Welch,  in  the  Introduction  to  this  works  says:  “In  Jesus  Christ 
is  the  hope  of  society,  as  well  as  of  individuals.  Those  who  worship  Him 
and  those  who  serve  Him  should  be  at  one  to  put  Him  on  the  world’s  throne.” 
(P.  7.)  Mr.  Stelzle,  in  discussing  the  Spirit  of  Social  Unrest,  says:  “We 
must  socialize  our  teaching  and  socially  convert  our  (Church)  membership. 
There  is  many  an  honest  Church  member  who  has  been  converted  spiritually 
but  who  has  never  caught  the  social  vision.  He  has  never  been  converted 
socially.  There  is  a great  difference  between  the  two.  There  are  many 
professing  Christians  who  believe  they  are  keeping  the  first  great  command- 
ment, but  who  are  altogether  ignoring  the  second,  which  Christ  said  was  like 
unto  the  first.”  (P.  34.) 


Christian  Sociology.  By  J.  H.  W.  Stuckenberg,  Professor  in  the  The- 
ological Department  of  Wittenberg  College.  Funk  and  Wagnalls  Company. 

This  work  is  designed  to  show  the  Origin  Character  and  Relations  of 
the  Christian  Society  formed  by  Jesus  Christ.  In  setting  forth  the  obliga- 
tions resting  upon  Christians  toward  the  world  much  practical  truth  is  given. 
A few  quotations  only  can  here  be  presented.  In  speaking  of  the  character 
and  work  of  Jesus  he  says:  “Jesus  was  not  a politician,  and  he  gives 
neither  specific  rules  in  his  teachings,  nor  illustrations  for  all  the  duties  of 
the  statesman;  but  the  principles  of  government  and  the  basis  of  all 
statesmanship  are  given  by  Christ,  so  that  from  the  Gospel  a system  of 
Christian  politics  may  be  constructed.”  (P.  90.) 

In  speaking  more  specifically  of  the  mission  of  the  Christian  Society, 


29 


he  says:  “Christian  Society  aims  at  the  redemption  of  man  and  of  the 
world  from  the  thralldom  of  sin  and  from  the  dominion  of  evil.”  (P.  186.) 

On  the  question  of  Religion  and  the  State  he  speaks  as  follows:  “The 
relation  of  the  Church  to  the  State  is  not  a burning  question  in  America,  as  it 
is  in  Europe,  since  we  have  no  union  of  Church  and  State.  In  the  Urxted 
States  the  question  could  hardly  have  arisen,  whether  the  Church  would 
ever  be  absorbed  by  the  State.  But  the  realtion  of  religion  and  of  Christian 
society  to  the  State  is  a vital  question  for  America,  as  well  as  for  Europe, 
and  it  is  a subject  which  is  exciting  more  attention  than  formerly.  While 
some  are  working  to  secure  the  recognition  of  God  in  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States,  others  are  working  to  prevent  the  appointment  of  chaplains, 
the  recognition  of  Sunday,  and  everything  else  that  savors  of  religion,  by  our 
government. 

“Christianity  is  a spiritual  power,  which  tries  to  establish  and  perpetuate 
itself  by  spiritual  means,  and  by  earthly  instrumentalities  so  far  as  they  are 
right  and  promote  divine  truth.  In  the  State  Christian  Society  can  demand 
protection  in  the  exercise  of  its  rights.  But  it  has  no  right  to  interfere  with 
the  liberty  of  others,  and  to  demand  that  they  shall  give  up  their  religious 
views.  Coercion  in  spiritual  matters  is  totally  at  variance  with  the  spirit  of 
the  Christian  religion.  The  laws  may  protect  Christian  society  in  its  re- 
ligious exercises;  but  they  cannot  be  properly  used  to  coerce  men  to  become 
Christians.  Even  the  recognition  of  God  in  the  Constitution  seems  mockery, 
so  long  as  he  is  not  recognized  by  the  people  in  their  hearts.  To  say  that 
we,  the  people  of  the  United  States,  recognize  Almighty  God,  when  it  is 
patent  to  every  one  that  we  do  not,  is  a glaring  falsehood.  It  is  better  to 
work  for  the  recognition  of  God  in  the  heart  of  the  nation,  so  as  to  bring  the 
people  up  to  the  point  that  we  can  say  with  truth  in  the  Constitution  that 
we  recognize  him. 

“This  suggests  a radical  evil  which  Christian  soicety  is  called  to  re- 
move— namely,  the  tendency  to.  make  hobbies  of  mere  words  and  externals, 
instead  of  working  to  promote  deep'  and  vital  heart-religion.  It  is  the 
mission  of  this  Society  to  christianize  the  State,  not  to  secure  an  empty 
recognition  of  religion.  The  government  is  to  be  made  more  and  more  a 
real  theocracy;  but  this  can  only  be  done  by  making  the  truth  of  God 
supreme  in  the  hearts  of  men.  When  this  is  done,  then  everything  else 
will  follow.” 

“If  laws  are  enacted  which  are  in  conflict  with  the  believer’s  con- 
science, then  he  must  submit  to  the  punishment  for  violating  the  laws, 
rather  than  violate  his  conscience.  No  effort  should  then  be  spared  to 
remove  such  laws.  Indeed,  Christian  society  may  do  the  State  good  service 
in  the  efforts  to  secure  such  laws,  and  such  only,  as  are  right  and  will 
prove  a blessing  to  the  community.  Even  if  there  can  be  no  direct  religious 
legislation,  the  moral  standard  of  the  Gospel  may  be  made  the  ideal  of  the 
State.  A Christian  spirit  should  pervade  the  laws,  instead  of  the  atheistic 
spirit  which  some  would  infuse  into  them.”  (Pp.  193-195.) 


Note. — Dr.  Stuckenberg  does  not  oppose  the  proposition  to  acknowledge 
God  in  the  National  Constitution,  but  only  the  making  of  such  an  acknowl- 
edgment hypocritically.  The  National  Reform  Association  can  adopt  as  its 
own  every  word  in  the  above  quotations. 


X.  MISCELLANEOUS. 

Christian  Theology  and  Social  Progress.  By  F.  W.  Bussell.  E.  P. 

Dutton  and  Company,  New  York. 

Democracy  is  shown  to  have  received  much  from  Christianity.  “It 
may,  perhaps,  seem  needless  to  lay  further  emphasis  on  the  peculiar  debt  of 


30 


certain  modern  political  ideals  to  Christianity.  While  in  their  strictest 
sense  Christianity  and  Socialism  are  irreconciable,  the  vague  yet  potent 
connotations  of  the  term  ‘democracy’  are  inseparable  from  Christian  belief, 
and  if  divorced  from  this  vital  union,  fall  at  once  to  the  ground.  We  must 
choose  between  the  rival  merits  of  the  scientific  and  antique,  the  religious 
and  personal  view;  between  the  conception  suggested  by  Mach’avelli  and 
Hobbes  and  followed  more  or  less  openly  by  modern  statecraft,  and  a con- 
ception based  on  Christian  principles  reinforced  by  Roman  civil  law,  main- 
tained with  unabated  pretensions  through  the  Middle  Ages,  revived  against 
authority  by  Luther  for  a brief  space,  and  once  more  proposed  by  Rousseau 
and  the  genuine  ‘liberalism’  he  called  into  being.”  (Pp.  324,  328.) 

The  Kingdom  of  God.  By  James  S.  Candlish,  D.D.  T.  & T.  Clark, 
Edinburgh. 


The  author  considers  the  Kingdom  of  God  both  Biblically  and  histor- 
ically. In  stating  the  purpose  of  Jesus  Christ  in  coming  into  the  world  he 
says  that  “Jesus’  ideal  was  a social  one;  his  aim  is  not  merely  to  elevate 
and  sanctify  individuals,  but  to  unite  them  into  a community,  to  renevate 
society,  and,  indeed,  ultimately  humanity  itself.  This  is  indicated  by  the 
name  Kingdom  of  God,  and  is  proved  by  all  the  considerations  that  show 
that  the  name  is  not  a mere  figure  of  speech,  but  the  appropriate  designa- 
tion of  a great  reality.  The  notion  of  the  Kingdom  of  God  in  the  sense  of 
Jesus  is  wide  enough  to  include  all  the  relations  of  life,  and  the  promotion 
of  it  is  an  adequate  expression  of  the  task  of  the  Christian  life.”  (P.  205.) 


The  World  the  Subject  of  Redemption.  By  Canon  W.  H.  Freemantle. 
Longmans,  Green  and  Company,  New  York. 

This  work  is  a series  of  lectures  delivered  before  the  Unviersity  of 
Oxford.  They  are  based  on  John  5:17:  “God  sent  not  his  Son  into  the 
world  to  condemn  the  world,  but  that  the  world,  through  him,  might  be 
saved.”  In  the  opening  of  the  first  lecture  b;  raises  the  question,  “What  is 
the  world  which  Christ  came  to  save?  . . . We  mean  by  the  world 

the  organized  constitution  of  things  in  which  we  live,  including  the  material 
universe  so  far  as  we  apprehend  it,  but  chiefly  humanity,  which  (taking  the 
world  as  known  to  us),  is  its  crown.”  (P.  4.) 

“The  Nation  . . differs  from  all  voluntary  associations,  even  from 

that  of  public  worship,  in  that  it  is  more  distinctly  an  ordinance  of  God. 

We  may  worship  alone,  or  in  small  societies,  or  in  informal  gath- 
erings. Even  of  family  life  we  may  in  a great  measure  denude  ourselves. 
But  we  cannot  help  belonging  to  the  nation,  and  that  for  our  whole  life,  and 
with  all  that  we  have.  It  is  somteimes  assumed  that  the  organization  for 
worship  is  divine,  and  the  family  and  State,  as  it  is  said,  merely  human. 
But  the  contrary  is  the  case.  The  organization  for  worship  is  distinctly  and 
demonstrably  a formation  of  man;  the  family  and  the  State  are  institutions 
of  nature  and  of  God.”  (P.  320.) 

The  Gospel  for  the  Secular  Life.  By  F.  W.  Freemantle. 

In  this  series  of  sermons  preached  by  Canon  Fremantle  at  Oxford,  he 
takes  the  ground  that  the  sphere  of  gospel  influence  is  the  whole  life  of 
man.  The  second  sermon  in  the  series  is  entitled  “Religion  without  a 
Temple.”  In  it  he  declares  that  “The  nation  and  all  classes  in  it  should 
act  upon  Christian  principle,  that  laws  should  be  made  in  Christ’s  spirit  of 
justice,  that  the  relations  of  the  power  of  the  State  should  be  maintained  on 
a basis  of  Christian  equity,  that  all  public  acts  should  be  done  in  Christ’s 
spirit.”  (P.  75.) 

The  third  discourse  is  entitled  “The  Supremacy  of  Christ.”  After 
showing  that  he  must  be  recognized  as  supreme  in  Education,  in  Trade,  in 
Literature,  in  Art,  in  Science,  he  comes  finally  to  the  sphere  of  Politics, 
and  maintains  that  this  sphere  is  not  excluded.  He  says:  “It  is  believed 
by  many  that  the  sphere  of  politics  can  be  dissevered  from  that  of  religion 


31 


and  this  has  been  made  the  ground  of  theories  which,  whether  they  come 
from  the  clerical  or  the  secular  side,  are  equally  godless.  It  cannot  be  that 
the  public  life,  the  natural  home  of  justice,  should  be  separated  from  God, 
whose  very  nature  is  righteousness.”  (Pp.  109-110.) 


The  State  in  Its  Relation  With  the  Church.  By  W.  E.  Gladstone,  Esq. 
Two  volumes.  John  Murray,  Gondon. 

While  Mr.  Gladstone  writes  primarily  from  the  point  of  view  of  an 
established  religion,  his  words  apply  equally  well  to  the  general  relation  of 
States  to  religion.  “I  return,  then,  to  the  position  that,  as  the  nation  fulfills 
the  great  conditions  of  a person,  a real  unity  of  being,  of  deliberating,  of 
acting,  of  suffering;  and  these  in  a definite  manner,  and  upon  an  extended 
scale,  and  with  immense  moral  functions  to  discharge,  and  influences  to 
exercise,  both  upon  its  members  and  extrinsically ; therefore  it  has  that  kind 
of  clear,  large  and  conscious  responsibility  which  can  alone  be  met  by  its 
specifically  professing  a religion,  and  offering  through  its  organ,  the  State, 
that  worship  which  shall  publically  sanctify  its  acts.  That  which,  by  its 
governing  organ,  it  professes  Specially,  it  must  encourage  and  maintain 
throughout  its  inferior  members  as  a part  of  such  profession  itself.”  (Vol. 
I,  p.  105.) 


Divine  Aspects  of  Human  Society.  By  E.  D.  Huntington,  D.D. 

This  volume  consists  of  a series  of  lectures  delivered  before  the 
Brooklyn  Institute.  The  first  is  entitled,  “Society  a Divine  appointment.” 
Bishop  Huntington  says:  “Let  us  not  hesitate,  then,  to  plant  our  feet 
firmly,  even  by  definition,  on  the  broad  position  that  Society  is  a Divine  Ap- 
pointment. The  Former,  who  made  us,  made  us  to  be  social.  In  the  orig- 
inal plan  of  his  constitution,  man  was  not  meant  to  live  alone.  Though  it 
were  possible  for  every  individual  of  the  species  to  reach  the  perfection  of 
his  private  nature  in  a solitary  state, — which  it  is  not, — still  the  purpose  of 
God  in  His  creation  would  not  be  answered.”  (P.  11.) 

“The  great  whole  that  we  call  Society  has  been  arranged  by  the  Cre- 
ator in  a system  of  concentric  circles.  The  first  and  smallest  social  type  is 
the  family.  Its  primary  constituents  are  a man  and  a woman, — then 
parents  and  children,— sometimes  including  in  a complete  patriarchate,  all 
the  descendants  of  the  living  progenitor.  The  second  and  next  larger  is  the 
Tribe,  a group  of  families.  The  third  is  the  State,  varying  greatly  in  extent, 
sometimes  comprised  in  a single  city,  like  the  State  of  Athens,  which  with 
all  its  splendor,  power  and  fame,  contained  only  four  hundred  thousand 
inhabitants.  . . . Fourth  is  the  Nation,  a larger  collection  determined 

by  a common  origin,  a common  language,  and  contiguous  lands,  often  in- 
cluding several  political  organizations;  as  Athens,  Sparta,  Thebes,  were  all 
included  in  the  Greek  or  Hellenic  nation.  Fifth,  and  last,  is  the  Empire, 
a mightier  power,  a cluster  of  nations,  a ganglion  of  cities  and  provinces.” 
“It  is  not  a single  solar  system,  but  many, — the  whole  also  heliocentric, — 
God  the  central  and  supreme  Sun  of  all,  not  only  an  attracting  Law,  not 
only  an  irradiating  Light,  but  a conscious  Spirit  of  Life  and  a Personal 
Protector.  Toward  each  of  these  groups  He  has  a character  and  a name. — 
Father  of  the  families  of  the  earth.  Leader  of  the  tribes , Lord  of  the  states, 
King  of  the  nations,  Sovereign  of  the  empires.  (Pp.  35,  36.) 

“The  social  constitution  of  man,  and  the  relevation  of  Christ,  are  the 
two  correlated,  complemental  forces  which  bear  forward  the  progress  of  the 
world.  Together  they  prepare  that  renewed,  just,  free,  merciful  and  holy 
society  which  the  New  Testament  repeatedly  characterizes  as  the  kingdom 
of  heaven  on  earth.  ...  It  follows  that  when  the  great  truths  of 
Christianity  shall  have  become  embodied  in  the  actual  forms  of  govern- 
ment, education,  trade,  art,  letters,  mercy,  manners  and  worship,  and  shall 
have  controlled  Society  bv  their  living  power,  then  the  kingdom  of  Christ 
will  have  come.”  (P.  272.) 


32 


“Reform  without  Christianity  is  wild,  bitter,  barren,  and  soon  reactionary 
and  retrogressive.  Christianity  without  reform  is  a corruption  and  a false- 
hood.” (P.  297.) 

The  Spirit  of  Laws.  By  M.  De  Secondat,  Baron  de  Montesquieu, 
toyal  Exchange,  Edinburgh. 

The  bearing  of  religion  upon  princes  and  government  in  general  is 
touched  on.  “A  prince  who  loves  and  fears  religion,  is  a lion,  who  stoops 
to  the  hand  that  strokes  or  to  the  voice  that  appeases  him.  * He  who  fears 
and  hates  religion  is  like  the  savage  beast  that  growls  and  bites  the  chain 
which  prevents  his  flying  on  the  passenger.  He  who  has  no  religion  at  all 
is  that  terrible  animal  who  perceives  his  liberty  only  when  he  tears  in 
pieces  and  when  he  devours.  “The  Christian  religion  is  a stranger  to 
mere  despotic  power.  The  mildness  so  frequently  recommend  in  the 
gospel,  is  incompatible  with  the  despotic  rage  with  which  a prince  punishes 
his  subjects,  and  exercises  himself  in  cruelty.”  (Vol.  II,  pp.  119,  120.) 


Divine  Order  of  Human  Society.  By  R.  E.  Thompson,  S.  T.  D.  John 
).  Wattles,  Philadelphia. 

A modern  interpretation  of  Theocracy  as  opposed  to  secularism  on  the 
one  hand  and  ecclesiasticism  on  the  other  is  given.  “A  theocratic  nation 
is  neither  more  nor  less  than  one  which  acknowledges  God  as  its  supreme 
Ruler,  regards  His  will  as  the  highest  standard  of  national  conscience,  and 
sees  in  Him  a King  as  real  as  any  of  any  earthly  dynasty.  It  recognizes  all 
national  authority  as  delegated  by  Him.  It  holds  His  law  revealed  in  the 
written  Word  and  in  the  human  conscience  to  be  a higher  law  to  which 
the  wronged  and  oppressed  may  always  appeal.”  (P.  105.) 


The  Collected  Writings  of  James  Henley  Thornwell,  D.D.,  LL.D.  Pres- 
yterian  Committee  of  Publication,  Richmond,  Va. 

In  a sermon  on  National  Sins,  Dr.  Thornwell  says  that  the  State  must  be 
impressed  with  a profound  sense  of,  God’s  all-pervading  providence,  “and  of 
its  responsibility  to  Him  as  the  moral  Ruler  of  the  world.  The  powers  that 
be  are  ordained  of  Him.  From  Him  the  magistrate  receives  his  commission, 
and  in  His  fear  he  must  use  the  sword  as  a terror  to  evil-doers  and  a praise 
to  them  that  do  well.  Civil  government  is  an  institute  of  heaven,  founded 
in  the  character  of  men  as  social  and  moral,  and  is  designed  to  realize  the 
idea  of  justice.  . . As  the  State  is  essentially  moral  in  its  idea,  it  con- 

nects itself  directly  with  the  government  of  God.”  (Vol.  IV,  p.  514.) 

In  the  same  volume  is  a memorial  of  the  Southern  Presbyterian  Church, 
prepared  by  Dr.  Thornwell,  addressed  to  the  Congress  of  the  Confederate 
States,  asking  that  there  be  placed  in  the  Constitution  of  the  Southern  Con- 
federacy a recognition  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  That  constitution  already 
contained  a recognition  of  God.  A few  extracts  are  herewith  given. 

“It  is  not  enough  for  a State  which  enjoys  the  light  of  Divine  revelation 
to  acknowledge  in  general  terms  the  supremacy  of  God;  it  must  also  ac- 
knowledge. the  supremacy  of  His  Son,  whom  He  hath  appointed  heir  of  all 
things,  by  whom  also  he  made  the  worlds.  To  Jesus  Christ  all  power  in 
heaven  and  earth  is  committed.  To  Him  every  knee  shall  bow  and  every 
tongue  confess.  He  is  the  Ruler  of  nations,  the  King  of  kings  and  Lord  of 
lords.” 

“That  Jesus  Christ  is  the  supreme  Ruler  of  the  nations  we  know  with 
infallible  certainty,  if  we  accept  the  Scriptures  as  the  Word  of  God. 

“But  it  may  be  asked — and  this  is  the  core  of  all  the  perplexity  which 
attends  the  subject — Has  the  State  any  right  to  accept  the  Scriptures  as  the 
Word  of  God?  The  answer  requires  a distinction,  and  that  distinction 
seems  to  us  to  obviate  all  difficulty.  If  by  ‘accepting  the  Scriptures’  it  is 


33 


meant  that  the  State  has  a right  to  prescribe  them  as  a rule  of  faith  and 
practice  to  its  subjects,  the  answer  must  be  in  the  negative.  The  State  is 
lord  of  no  man’s  conscience.  As  long  as  he  preserves  the  peace  and  is  not 
injurious  to  the  public  welfare,  no  human  power  has  a right  to  control  his 
opinion  or  to  restrain  his  acts.  . . . But  if  by  ‘accepting  the  Scrip- 
tures’ it  is  meant  that  the  State  may  itself  believe  them  to  be  true,  and 
regulate  its  own  conduct  and  legislation  in  conformity  with  their  teachings, 
the  answer  must  be  in  the  affirmative.  As  a moral  person,  it  has  a con- 
science as  really  and  truly  as  every  individual  citizen.”  (Pp.  551,  552.) 

Messiah  the  Prince,  or  The  Mediatorial  Dominion  of  Jesus  Christ.  By 

William  Symington. 

In  considering  the  proof  that  Jesus  Christ  is  Ruler  of  Nations  the 
author  finds  his  first  argument  in  the  fact  that  “national  subjection  to  Jesus 
Christ  as  Mediator  is  directly  enjoined  upon  civil  rulers.  ‘Be  wise  now, 
therefore,  O ye  kings;  be  instructed,  ye  judges  of  the  earth.  Serve  the 
Lord  with  fear,  and  rejoice  with  trembling.  Kiss  the  Son,  lest  He  be  angry,  1 
and  ye  perish  from  the  way  when  his  wrath  is  kindled  but  a little.’  ” As  | 
proof  that  this  is  addressed  to  civil  rulers,  not  as  individuals  but  in  their 
official  capacity,  he  shows  that  the  Second  Psalm  from  which  the  quotation  is 
taken  represents  these  rulers  “in  their  public  capacity  as  plotting  against 
the  Lord  and  that  it  is  in  this  capacity  they  are  here  addressed.  (Pp. 
195,  196.) 


Commentaries  on  the  Laws  of  the  Ancient  Hebrews,  with  an  In- 
troductory Essay  on  Civil  Society  and  Government.  By  E.  C.  Wines,* 
D.D.,  LL.D.  Presbyterian  Board  of  Publication,  Philadelphia. 

The  Introductory  Essay  is  a very  valuable  contribution  to  the  literature 
on  political  science.  Of  the  origin  of  civil  government  Dr.  Wines  says:  “The  ! 
true  orgin  of  civil  government  and  its  ultimate  foundation,  undoubtedly 
lies  in  the  will  of  God.  Government  is,  therefore,  a divine  institution. 
Reason,  revelation,  and  the  best  human  authority,  concur  in  enforcing  this' 
conclusion.”  (p.  18.) 

“There  is  a general  concurrence  among  moral  and  political  philosophers  : 
in  the  doctrine,  that  civil  government  is  founded  on  the  will  of  God.”  (p.  29.) 
But  Dr.  Wines  does  ample  justice  to  the  Social  compact  theory  by  showing 
what  it  has  to  do  in  the  establishing  and  administration  of  civil  government. 
He  says:  “All  these,  society,  government,  law,  are,  at  the  same  time  truly 
divine  and  truly  human  institutions.  They  are  divine,  inasmuch  as  they  are  ! 
essential  agencies  in  carrying  out  the  divine  purposes  in  the  creation  of  i 
man.  They  are  human,  inasmuch  as  they  are  instituted  and  administered 
by  men,  without  any  special  and  immediate  interposition  of  the  Deity  (p.  33) 

Introduction  to  the  Study  of  International  Law.  By  Theodore  D.j 
Woolsey.  Scribner’s,  New  York. 

In  the  introductory  chapter,  which  treats  of  the  definition,  growth, 
jural  and  moral  grounds,  and  the  sources  of  International  La w,  Dr.  Woolsey: 
says  that  “There  are  moral  relations  which  give  rise  to  international  moral- \ 
ity.  It  may  be  said,  to  say  the  least,  that  nations  have  duties  and  moral 
claims,  as  well  as  rights  and  obligations.”  (P.  31;  see  16.) 

Life  and  Works  of  J.  R.  Sloane,  D.D.  Edited  by  Professor  Wm.  M.j 
Sloane.  A.  C.  Armstrong  and  Son. 

In  a number  of  addresses  published  in  this  volume,  Dr.  Sloane  main- 
tained with  great  power  and  eloquence  the  moral  character  and  accountabil- 
ity of  nations,  their  obligation  to  frame  their  laws  in  harmony  with  the 
divine  law,  and  the  duty  of  making  an  acknowledgment  of  the  divine  claims! 
upon  nations  in  their  frameworks  of  government.  _ I 

In  an  address  on  the  Moral  Character  of  the  Nation  he  said:  “Every | 
government,  by  equitable  laws,  is  a government  of  God;  a republic  thusf 


34 


governed  is  of  him,  through  the  people,  and  is  as  truly  and  really  a the- 
ocracy as  the  commonwealth  of  Israel.  The  refusal  to  acknowledge  this 
fact  is  as  much  a piece  of  foolish  impiety  as  that  of  the  man  who  persists 
in  refusing  to  acknowledge  that  God  is  the  Author  of  his  existence.”  (P.  273.) 

• 

Civil  Government.  A series  of  Lectures  on  Romans  i3*:i-7.  By  Rev. 
rames  M.  Willson,  D.D. 

With  great  clearness  and  power  Dr.  Willson  sets  forth  the  teachings 
of  the  Divine  Word  as  to  civil  government.  In  speaking  of  the  authority  of 
those  who  bear  rule  he  says: 

“They  derive  their  power  from  God,  or  in  other  words,  government  is  a 
divine  institution,  originating  in,  and,  of  course,  sanctioned  by  the  will  of 
God.  National  organization  is  not  the  cere  creature  of  the  voluntary  action 
of  the  inhabitants  of  a particular  country  or  district.”  (Pp.  25,  46.) 

The  Next  Great  Awakening.  By  Josiah  Strong.  The  Baker  and  Tay- 
or  Company,  New  York. 

This,  as  well  as  other  works  of  Dr.  Strong,  such  as  Our  Country,  The 
New  Era,  The  Twentieth  Century,  are  helpful. 

A number  of  books  will  be  named  without  making  any  extracts.  All  these 
vill  be  helpful  in  gaining  a correct  and  full  knowledge  of  politics  both  theo- 
etical  and  practical. 

Te  Political  Theories  of  the  Ancient  World.  By  W.  W.  Willoughby.  Long- 
mans, Green  and  Company,  New  York. 

Christianity  and  the  Social  Order.  By  R.  J.  Campbell.  The  Macmillan  Com- 
pany, New  York. 

Te  Approach  to  the  Social  Question.  By  F.  G.  Peabody.  The  Macmillan 
Company,  New  York. 

tandards  of  Public  Morality.  By  A.  T.  Hadley.  The  Macmillan  Company, 
New  York. 

ome  Ethical  Gains  Through  Legislation.  By  Florence  Kelley.  The  Mac- 
millan Company,  New  York. 

mierican  Political  Ideas.  By  John  Fiske.  Harper  and  Brothers,  New  York, 
'heolcgy  and  the  Social  Consciousness.  By  H.  C.  King.  The  Macmillan 
Company,  New  York. 


XI.  PUBLICATIONS  ISSUED  BY  THE  NATIONAL  REFORM 

ASSOCIATION. 

Tanual  of  Christian  Civil  Government.  By  the  Rev.  D.  McAllister,  D.D., 
LL.D.  300  pages,  bound  in  manila  paper,  25c  a copy.  By  mail,  30c 
a copy. 

abbath  Laws  in  the  United  States.  By  the  Rev.  R.  C.  Wylie,  D.D.  250 
pages,  bound  in  paper,  35c  a copy;  bound  in  cloth,  75c  a copy, 
ur  National  Christianity  and  Fundamental  Law.  By  the  Rev.  John  A. 

Henderson,  D.D.  16  pages,  5c  a copy ; $2.50  a hundred, 
hrist  the  Ruler  of  Nations.  By  the  Rev.  T.  P.  Stevenson,  D.D.,  LL.D.  16 
1 pages,  3c  a copy;  $1.50  a hundred. 

he  Principles  of  National  Religion.  By  Dr.  Wylie.  20  pages,  3c  a copy; 
- $1.50  a hundred. 


35 


3 0112  098472043 

By  the  Rev'.  F.  M.  Wilson.  24  page.J^^| 


The  Christian  Citizenship  Pledge. 

a copy;  $1.50  a hundred. 

The  Constitutionality  of  Reading  the  Bible  in  the  Public  Schools.  By  DrH 

McAllister.  20  pages,  5c  a copy ; $2.50  a hundred. 


Our  Educational  System:  Is  it  Christian  or  Secular?  By  Dr.  Wylie.  Jj 
pages,  ioc  a copy ; $5.00  a hundred. 

The  Sabbath  and  the  Working  Man.  By  Rev.  J.  A.  Cosby,  3c  a copy. 

A Christian  Nation,  or  Political  Atheism,  Which? 

Assault  Upon  the  Use  of  the  Bible  in  Our 
postpaid. 


h?  Reply  to  Rabbi  LeM 
Public  Schools,  sc  a c^H 

)r.  Stevenson.  10  page^B 

§■8 

M.  Downie.  8 pages,  5c  a copy; 


Lynch  Law  and  the  Principles  of  Justice.  By  Dr.  Stevenson.  10  page* 


a copy;  $1.50  a hundred. 

To  an  Unknown  God.  By  R.  ^ _ t,J  , 

hundred. 

The  Christian  Amendment  and  the  Liquor  Traffic^  By  the  Rev.  T.  B.  AnB 
son,  D.D.  12  pages,  3c  a copy;  $1.50  a hundred. 

The  National  Reform  Association — A Plea  for  Its ’Moral  and  Financial  sH 
port.  Free. 

A Plea  for  Religion  in  the  Nation.  By  Dr.  StevenoSn.  31  pages,  3c  a ccH 
5 copies,  ioc. 

The  Religious  Character  of  the  National  Reform  Movement.  Br.  Dr.  Stef"^ 

son.  16  pages,  3c  a copy;  10  copies,  25c. 

Religion  in  Pubjic  School  Education.  Reply  to  Rabbi  Levy.  5c  a c<p 
postpaid. 

“This  is  a Christian  Nation,’’  U.  S.  Supreme  Court  Decision,  with  annotati 
by  Dr.  R.  C.  Wylie.  12  pages,  5 cents. 

The  Association  is  now  issuing  a new  series  of  leaflets  entitled  “Stul 
in  Christian  Citizenship,”  which  will  be  furnished  at  the  uniform  price  j 
cents  a copy;  10  copies,  25  cents;  50  copies,  $1.00;  100  copies,  $1.50.  The; 


lowing  numbers  are  now  ready : 


Christian  Citizenship  Defined.  By -the  Rev.  R.  C.  Wylie. 

The  True  Idea  of  the  State.  By  the  Rev.  D.  McAllister,  D.D.,  LL.D. 

The  Origin  of  the  State.  By  Dr.  McAllister. 

The  Ultimate  Source  of  the  State’s  Authority.  By  Dr.  McAllitser. 

The  Moral  Ends  of  the  State.  By  Dr.  McAllister. 

The  Institution  of  Civil  Government.  By  Dr.  R.  C.  Wylie. 

The  Relation  of  Nations  to  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Bv  Rev.  J.  S.  Martin. MM 
Christ’s  Government  of  the  Nations.  Bv  Dr.  R.  C.  Wylie. 


The  Relation  of  Civil  Government  to  the  Bible.  Bv  Dr.  William  Parsons 


The  Moral  Personality  of  the  Nation.  By  Rev.  T.  H.  Acheson,  D.D. 

The  Moral  Responsibility  of  Nations.  By  the  Rev.  S.  F.  Scovel.  D.D.,  LfflBj 
The  Forgiveness  of  National  Sins.  Bv  Dr.  T.  P.  Stevenson. 

What  Constitutes  a Christian  State.  Bv  Dr.  Stevenson. 

Is  the  United  States  a Christian  Nation?  By  Dr.  T.  P.  Stevenson. 

National  Christianity  in  the  Public  School.  By  Dr.  R.  C.  Wylie. 

The  Bible  in  the  Public  Schools.  By  Rev.  W.  F.  McCauley. 

Our  National  Thanksgiving  Festival.  Bv  Dr.  R.  C.  Wylie. 

Religious  Defect  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States.  Bv  the  Rev 
Craven.  D.D.,  LL.D. 


Send  orders  for  publications  in  Class  XI  to 
THE  NATIONAL  REFORM  ASSOCIATION, 
Room  603,  Publication  Bldg.,  209  Ninth  St.,  Pittsburgh,  Pa. 


3C) 


